Presentation of the definition of Triple Terms

[afs]

(Refers to RDF Concepts as of 2024-11-01)

There is no section for the definition of "Triple Term" - this stands out in the TOC for section 3. RDF Graphs.

3. RDF Graphs

• 3.1 Triples
• 3.2 IRIs
• 3.3 Literals
  • 3.3.1 Initial Text Direction
• 3.4 Blank Nodes
• 3.5 Replacing Blank Nodes with IRIs
• 3.6 Graph Comparison

3 subsections for RDF terms, no subsection for "Triple Term".

The definition of "triple term" is within section 3.1 ("Triples").

There is section 1.3 Triple Terms which discusses triple terms, reifying triples and reification.

Suggestion:

• Rename 1.3 as "Triple Terms and Reification"
• Create a new subsection "Triple Terms" in section 3 with the material from "A triple term is a 3-tuple that is defined recursively as follows:" to the end of the three notes.

The new "Triple terms" subsection could go after "Blank Nodes" before "Replacing Blank Nodes", to agree with the order in IRIs, literals, blank nodes, and triple terms are collectively known as RDF terms.

For consistency, maybe move the discussion "Initial Text Direction" (non-normative section ) to after the normative, defining sections for triples and the 4 RDF terms. "Replacing Blank Nodes with IRIs" is already a separate section. If keeping to the earlier term order style, "Initial Text Direction", then "Replacing Blank Nodes with IRIs".

[afs]

While working on this issue, I notices that the use of h2/h3 header levels is inconsistent. Teh indentation is consistent. It does not affect the rendered HTML.

Output of grep for <h.> with indent

  <h2>Introduction</h2>
    <h3>Graph-based Data Model</h3>
    <h3>Resources and Statements</h3>
    <h3>Triple Terms and Reification</h3>
    <h3>The Referent of an IRI</h3>
    <h3>RDF Vocabularies and Namespace IRIs</h3>
    <h2>RDF and Change over Time</h2>
    <h3>Working with Multiple RDF Graphs</h3>
    <h3>Equivalence, Entailment and Inconsistency</h3>
    <h2>RDF Documents and Syntaxes</h2>
    <h2>Strings in RDF</h2>
  <h2>RDF Graphs</h2>
    <h3>Triples</h3>
    <h3>IRIs</h3>
    <h2>Literals</h2>
    <h2>Blank Nodes</h2>
    <h3>Triple Terms</h3>
    <h3>Initial Text Direction</h3>
    <h3>Replacing Blank Nodes with IRIs</h3>
    <h3>Graph Comparison</h3>
  <h2>RDF Datasets</h2>
    <h3>RDF Dataset Comparison</h3>
    <h3>Content Negotiation of RDF Datasets</h3>
      <h3>Dataset as a Set of Quads</h3>
  <h2>Datatypes</h2>
    <h3>The XML Schema Built-in Datatypes</h3>
    <h3>Datatype IRIs</h3>
  <h2>Fragment Identifiers</h2>
  <h2>Generalized RDF Triples, Graphs, and Datasets</h2>
  <h2>Additional Datatypes</h2>
    <h3>The <code>rdf:HTML</code> Datatype</h3>
    <h3>The <code>rdf:XMLLiteral</code> Datatype</h3>
    <h3>The <code>rdf:JSON</code> Datatype</h3>
  <h2>Privacy Considerations</h2>
  <h2>Security Considerations</h2>
  <h2>Internationalization Considerations</h2>
  <h2>IRI Grammar</h2>
  <h2>Acknowledgments</h2>
    <h3>Acknowledgments for RDF 1.0</h3>
    <h3>Acknowledgments for RDF 1.1</h3>
    <h3>Acknowledgments for RDF 1.2</h3>
  <h2>Changes between RDF 1.1 and RDF 1.2</h2>

[afs]

The sections "The Referent of an IRI" and "RDF Vocabularies and Namespace IRIs" seem more generally important. The section order would be:

• 1.2 Resources and Statements
• 1.3 The Referent of an IRI
• 1.4 RDF Vocabularies and Namespace IRIs
• 1.5 Triple Terms and Reification
• 1.6 RDF and Change over Time

[gkellogg]

While working on this issue, I notices that the use of h2/h3 header levels is inconsistent. Teh indentation is consistent. It does not affect the rendered HTML.

Output of grep for <h.> with indent

While they should be consistent, ReSpec ignores which particular form is used, IIRC.