this version of the changes use 'abstract data model' instead of 'abstract model' and reintroduces 'abstract syntax' where the text concerns syntax.

Author: lisp

spec/index.html

@@ -79,7 +79,7 @@
     representing information on the Web.
     This document defines an abstract data model
     which serves to link all RDF-based languages and specifications.
-    The abstract model has two key data structures:</p>
+    The abstract data model has two key data structures:</p>
   <ul>
     <li>RDF graphs are sets of subject-predicate-object triples,
       where the elements may be IRIs, blank nodes, datatyped literals, or triple terms.
@@ -137,7 +137,7 @@ <h2>Introduction</h2>
   <section id="data-model">
     <h3>Graph-based Abstract Data Model</h3>
 
-    <p>The core structure of the abstract model is a set of
+    <p>The core structure of the abstract data model is a set of
       <a data-lt="RDF triple">triples</a>, each consisting of a <a>subject</a>,
       a <a>predicate</a> and an <a>object</a>. A set of such triples is called
       an <a>RDF graph</a>. An RDF graph can be visualized as a node and
@@ -305,7 +305,7 @@ <h3>RDF Vocabularies and Namespace IRIs</h3>
       would be abbreviated as <code>rdf:XMLLiteral</code>.
       Note however that such abbreviations are <em>not</em> meant to be processed directly as IRIs,
       and are not to be used in syntactic contexts where IRIs are expected.
-      Note also that [=namespace IRIs=] and [=namespace prefixes=] are not a formal part of the RDF abstract model.
+      Note also that [=namespace IRIs=] and [=namespace prefixes=] are not a formal part of the RDF abstract data model.
       They are merely a syntactic convenience for abbreviating IRIs;
       for processing, the actual IRIs are reconstructed by replacing each namespace prefix with the corresponding namespace IRI.
     </p>
@@ -400,7 +400,7 @@ <h3>Triple Terms and Reification</h3>
   <section id="change-over-time">
     <h3>RDF and Change over Time</h3>
 
-    <p>The RDF abstract model is <em>atemporal</em>: <a>RDF graphs</a>
+    <p>The RDF abstract data model is <em>atemporal</em>: <a>RDF graphs</a>
       are static snapshots of information.</p>
 
     <p>However, <a>RDF graphs</a> can express information
@@ -595,13 +595,13 @@ <h3>RDF Version Announcement</h3>
 </section>
 
 <section id="conformance">
-  <p>This specification, <em>RDF 1.2 Concepts and Abstract Model</em>,
-    defines an abstract model and related vocabulary for use in
+  <p>This specification, <em>RDF 1.2 Concepts and Abstract Data Model</em>,
+    defines an abstract data model and related vocabulary for use in
     other specifications, such as
     <a>concrete RDF syntaxes</a>,
     API specifications, and query languages.
     Implementations cannot directly conform to
-    <em>RDF 1.2 Concepts and Abstract Model</em>,
+    <em>RDF 1.2 Concepts and Abstract Data Model</em>,
     but can conform to such other specifications that normatively
     reference terms defined here.</p>
 
@@ -847,7 +847,7 @@ <h3>IRIs</h3>
       is a <a>string</a> that conforms to the syntax
       defined in RFC 3987 [[!RFC3987]].</p>
 
-    <p>An IRI in the RDF abstract model
+    <p>An IRI in the RDF abstract syntax
       <!-- this passeage does not discuss abstract syntax. it concerns concrete systax -->
       MUST be <a data-cite="RFC3986#section-5">resolved</a> per [[RFC3986]] and
       MUST NOT be a <a data-cite="RFC3986#section-4.2">relative reference</a>.
@@ -860,7 +860,7 @@ <h3>IRIs</h3>
       <a data-cite="I18N-GLOSSARY#dfn-code-point" class="lint-ignore">Unicode code points</a>,
       as in Simple String Comparison in
       <a data-cite="rfc3987#section-5.3.1">section 5.3.1</a> of [[!RFC3987]].
-      (This is done in the abstract model, so the IRIs are resolved
+      (This is done in the abstract syntax, so the IRIs are resolved
       IRIs with no escaping or encoding.)
       Further normalization MUST NOT be performed before this comparison. </p>
 
@@ -878,7 +878,7 @@ <h3>IRIs</h3>
         An IRI reference is common usage of an Internationalized Resource Identifier.
         An IRI reference refers to either a resolved <a>IRI</a> or <a>relative IRI reference</a>,
         as described by the <em>IRI-reference</em> production in <a href="#iri-abnf" class="sectionRef"></a>.
-        The abstract model uses only fully resolved <a>IRIs</a>.
+        The abstract syntax uses only fully resolved <a>IRIs</a>.
         When IRIs are used in operations that are only
         defined for URIs, they must first be converted according to
         the mapping defined in
@@ -1009,7 +1009,7 @@ <h4>Representation of Literals</h4>
       <p>Some concrete syntaxes MAY support
         <dfn data-lt="simple literal" class="export">simple literals</dfn> consisting of only a
         <a>lexical form</a> without any <a>datatype IRI</a>, <a>language tag</a>, or <a>base direction</a>.
-        Simple literals are syntactic sugar for data model
+        Simple literals are syntactic sugar for abstract syntax
         <a>literals</a>
         with the <a>datatype IRI</a>
         <code>http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string</code>
@@ -1038,7 +1038,7 @@ <h4>Representation of Literals</h4>
         In RDF 1.1, `"chat"@fr` and `"chat"@FR` represent two distinct terms,
         but implementations may replace either with the other via some form of normalization.
         In RDF 1.2, they represent the exact same literal,
-        i.e., the case difference in the concrete syntax does not propagate into the abstract model.
+        i.e., the case difference in the concrete syntax does not propagate into the abstract syntax.
         Since many RDF 1.1 implementations do normalize language tags internally, they will not be impacted by this change.
       </aside>
 
@@ -1146,7 +1146,7 @@ <h3>Blank Nodes</h3>
       They are always locally scoped to the file or RDF store,
       and are <em>not</em> persistent or portable identifiers
       for blank nodes. Blank node identifiers are <em>not</em>
-      part of the RDF abstract model, but are entirely dependent
+      part of the RDF abstract data model, but are entirely dependent
       on the concrete syntax or implementation. The syntactic restrictions
       on blank node identifiers, if any, therefore also depend on
       the concrete RDF syntax or implementation.  Implementations that handle blank node
@@ -1917,7 +1917,7 @@ <h3>The <code>rdf:JSON</code> Datatype</h3>
 <section id="section-skolemization">
   <h2>Replacing Blank Nodes with IRIs</h2>
 
-  <p>Blank nodes do not have identifiers in the RDF abstract model. The
+  <p>Blank nodes do not have identifiers in the RDF abstract data model. The
     <a>blank node identifiers</a> introduced
     by some concrete syntaxes have only
     local scope and are purely an artifact of the serialization.</p>
@@ -1973,8 +1973,8 @@ <h2>Privacy Considerations</h2>
 <section id="security" class="appendix informative">
   <h2>Security Considerations</h2>
 
-  <p>The RDF Abstract Model is not used directly for conveying information,
-    although concrete serialization forms are specifically intended to do so.</p>
+  <p>The RDF Abstract Data Model is not used directly for conveying information.
+    Concrete serialization forms are specifically intended to do so.</p>
 
   <p>Applications can evaluate given data to infer more assertions or to dereference <a>IRIs</a>,
     invoking the security considerations of the scheme for that IRI.
@@ -2189,7 +2189,7 @@ <h2>Changes between RDF 1.1 and RDF 1.2</h2>
     <li>Improved the use of IRI terminology,
       and added <a href="#iri-abnf" class="sectionRef"></a>.
       This improves the language using <a>relative IRI references</a>
-      and clarifies that, in the abstract model, IRIs are resolved,
+      and clarifies that, in the abstract syntax, IRIs are resolved,
       avoiding the incorrect use of "absolute IRI".</li>
     <li>Changed reference from DOM4, which was not a recommendation at the time, to [[DOM]],
       making the definitions of <a>rdf:HTML</a> and <a>rdf:XMLLiteral</a> datatypes normative.</li>