W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org > April 2005

Re: Comments on SPARQL 17-Feb-2005 draft (DESCRIBE)

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 14:13:40 -0500
To: public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org, Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>
Message-Id: <1112987620.15813.20.camel@localhost>

> 2. DESCRIBE result type
> 
> I think the desired effect could be achieved using standard SPARQL queries 
> with some special RDF vocabulary, or maybe in conjunction with something 
> like Larry Masinter's tdb: URI scheme proposal 
> (http://larry.masinter.net/duri.html).  Therefore, I think it has NO PLACE 
> in the base SPARQL specification, since it adds to implementer burden 
> without creating any otherwise-unavailable functionality.

I think the WG considered this argument under the DESCRIBE issue.
  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/issues#DESCRIBE

which, by the way, was closed without consensus, i.e. over an
objection. So that will have to get reviewed when we request CR/PR.
Though I don't see sufficient new information to re-open this issue in
the WG, I have noted your comment under the DESCRIBE issue so that it
will be part of that review.

Feel free to add any further arguments that perhaps the WG
has not considered, and please stay tuned for our last call
documents; I hope by then we will have achieved a greater
level of consensus.

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Friday, 8 April 2005 19:13:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:14:48 GMT