Suggestions from January review on §3.4 #198
Conversation
Bob DuCharme's 9th comment https://www.w3.org/mid/[email protected]
Bob DuCharme's 11th comment https://www.w3.org/mid/[email protected]
pchampin
added
spec:editorial
| @@ -791,7 +791,7 @@ <h3>Literals</h3> | |||
| <p>Literals are used for values such as strings, numbers, and dates.</p> | |||
|
|
|||
| <p>A <dfn data-local-lt="RDF literal">literal</dfn> in an <a>RDF graph</a> consists of | |||
| two, three, or four elements, as follow:</p> | |||
| two, three, or four component elements, as follows:</p> | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just a suggestion ("component elements" sounds a bit weird to me):
| two, three, or four component elements, as follows:</p> | |
| two, three, or four components, as follows:</p> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Small tweak.
two, three, or four components, as follow:</p>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@TallTed the change from "as follow" to "as follows" was suggested by @bobdc, and makes sense to me because
- everywhere else, we use "as follows"
- my understanding, confirmed by a quick web search, is that "as follows" is grammatically correct, while "as follow" is not
Any argument in the defense of "as follow"?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There are differing opinions on this bit of grammar. To my ear, follow sounds better after a plural antecedent. I think the best solution would be to change follow(s) to below, for which there is no belows.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"components" is also used as "The three components (s, p, o) of an RDF triple. "component element" is an attempt to distinguish the usage at this point then continue using "element" in the rest of the next. It leaves "element" in the rest of the section alone.
If its one word "component" here the rest of the section needs updating as well. "if the third element is present" etc.
Co-authored-by: Olaf Hartig <[email protected]>
Preview | Diff