Skip to content

Further explain abstract data model and abstract syntax #238

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 12 commits into from
Sep 23, 2025
Merged

Further explain abstract data model and abstract syntax #238

merged 12 commits into from
Sep 23, 2025

Conversation

niklasl
Copy link
Contributor

@niklasl niklasl commented Sep 7, 2025 •
edited by pr-preview bot
Loading

Following #232, this adds to the introductions of the abstract data model and syntaxes, respectively, to further explain their respective meanings.

In the subsection about the abstract data model:

  • Notes that this is a mathematical structure.
  • Adds a diagram showing the same term used in two triples as a single node.
  • Adds text about this being the basis of syntax and interpretation, and noting the difference between graph structure and conceptual modelling.

In the subsection about documents and syntaxes:

  • Adds a definition of the abstract syntax (not as formal grammar, but as two similarly structured tables).

(There are also a few related minor adjustments.)

While merely adding content, this also seeks more balanced proportions between the introductory subsections. Some of the points may be obvious, but the goal is to clarify these notions to a wider audience with varying backgrounds.

Working preview using githack (the generated one below doesn't show SVGs)

Preview | Diff

@niklasl
Explain abstract data model and abstract syntax
01abead 
In the subsection about the abstract data model:
* Note that this is a mathematical structure.
* Add a diagram showing the same term in two triples as a single node.
* Add text about this being the basis of syntax and interpretation.

In the subsection about documents and syntaxes:
* Add a two-table definition of the abstract syntax.

Also adjust a few related pieces.
pchampin
pchampin reviewed Sep 8, 2025
View reviewed changes
niklasl and others added 2 commits September 9, 2025 14:48
@niklasl @pchampin
Remove redundant triple term production
6957db3 
Co-authored-by: Pierre-Antoine Champin <github-100614@champin.net>
@niklasl @pchampin
Avoid overloaded definition
1dd141d 
Co-authored-by: Pierre-Antoine Champin <github-100614@champin.net>
This was referenced Sep 11, 2025
Closed
Merged
hartig
hartig reviewed Sep 13, 2025
View reviewed changes
domel
domel reviewed Sep 13, 2025
View reviewed changes
@niklasl
Remove markup of "and" in tuple/pair constructs
65075b9 
to consistently treat them as prose there, like the commas and articles,
as in the RDF dataset definition.

(This is different from the markup "or" when used as the disjunctive
operator.)
pchampin
pchampin approved these changes Sep 15, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@pchampin pchampin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

approved, with the pending change in §3.3

@pfps pfps added ms:CR Milestone: Candidate Recommendation spec:editorial Minor change in the specification (markup, typo, informative text; class 1 or 2) labels Sep 16, 2025
@TallTed
Copy link
Member

TallTed commented Sep 17, 2025

#242 is related to this.

I got notification of the commit 8b566d1 before this PR.

@pchampin pchampin mentioned this pull request Sep 18, 2025
Closed
@niklasl niklasl requested a review from domel September 18, 2025 16:15
@niklasl
Copy link
Contributor Author

niklasl commented Sep 18, 2025

@domel I think your concerns are now addressed? I re-requested a review from you, and if you accept I can merge this (discussed during the telecon today). There is a separate issue, #242, raised by @TallTed, which is about a possible further change.

@w3cbot
Copy link

w3cbot commented Sep 18, 2025

This was discussed during the #rdf-star meeting on 18 September 2025.

View the transcript

Pull Request 238 Further explain abstract data model and abstract syntax (by niklasl) [ms:CR] [spec:editorial]

pchampin: PR 238 (Concepts) has approval from the editors
… ah, that's the one we discussed earlier
… One PR on RDF Concepts by William is open

TallTed
TallTed reviewed Sep 18, 2025
View reviewed changes
TallTed
TallTed reviewed Sep 18, 2025
View reviewed changes
TallTed
TallTed reviewed Sep 18, 2025
View reviewed changes
TallTed
TallTed reviewed Sep 18, 2025
View reviewed changes
TallTed
TallTed reviewed Sep 18, 2025
View reviewed changes
TallTed
TallTed reviewed Sep 18, 2025
View reviewed changes
TallTed
TallTed reviewed Sep 18, 2025
View reviewed changes
TallTed
TallTed reviewed Sep 18, 2025
View reviewed changes
TallTed
TallTed suggested changes Sep 18, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@TallTed TallTed left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Not yet approved. Depends on the handling of my comments above.

@niklasl @TallTed
Correct spelling
a8773e4 
Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <tthibodeau@openlinksw.com>
@TallTed
Copy link
Member

TallTed commented Sep 18, 2025

I think #242 was overtaken by events. I'll leave it open for now, and probably close it based on resolution of all of the above.

@niklasl @TallTed
Editorial improvement
b9efc23 
Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <tthibodeau@openlinksw.com>
afs
afs reviewed Sep 19, 2025
View reviewed changes
@niklasl @afs
Remove use of MAY in a statement of fact
41ea12c 
Co-authored-by: Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org>
@afs afs mentioned this pull request Sep 19, 2025
Merged
@afs afs requested a review from TallTed September 19, 2025 16:09
niklasl
niklasl commented Sep 19, 2025
View reviewed changes
@afs @niklasl
Update spec/index.html
904fc46 
Co-authored-by: Niklas Lindström <lindstream@gmail.com>
@afs
Copy link
Contributor

afs commented Sep 20, 2025

Looks like all reviews comments have been responded to. I think we should merge this.

Given the amount of change to RDF Concepts in section 1, we should have a whole document review before the review+CR steps for consistency.

@niklasl niklasl mentioned this pull request Sep 20, 2025
Open
@afs afs merged commit c4b7b75 into w3c:main Sep 23, 2025
2 checks passed
@niklasl niklasl deleted the graph-data-model-description branch September 23, 2025 20:15
@afs afs removed the request for review from gkellogg September 24, 2025 07:49
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@afs afs afs approved these changes

@pchampin pchampin pchampin approved these changes

@domel domel domel approved these changes

@hartig hartig hartig approved these changes

@pfps pfps pfps approved these changes

@lisp lisp Awaiting requested review from lisp

@franconi franconi Awaiting requested review from franconi

@TallTed TallTed Awaiting requested review from TallTed

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

ms:CR Milestone: Candidate Recommendation spec:editorial Minor change in the specification (markup, typo, informative text; class 1 or 2)

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

9 participants

@niklasl @TallTed @w3cbot @afs @domel @lisp @pchampin @hartig @pfps