W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org > June 2007

Re: comments on SPARQL Query Language for RDF

From: Kendall Clark <kendall@monkeyfist.com>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 19:59:47 -0400
Message-Id: <B8B0E03D-4810-4202-92EC-BE7B93A32D7B@monkeyfist.com>
Cc: Jeen Broekstra <jeen.broekstra@aduna-software.com>, Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org, Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>, Richard Newman <rnewman@franz.com>
To: Bob MacGregor <bmacgregor@siderean.com>


On May 31, 2007, at 7:52 PM, Bob MacGregor wrote:

> Kendall,
>
> With respect to quads, I agree with you.  But it took this  
> discourse with Richard, Pat, and Jeen to convince me
> that SPARQL has come about as far as triples will allow it.
>
> I still think that SPARQL ought to have a declarative semantics,  
> and I still think that UNBOUND should not
> be integral to the language, for the reasons described earlier.   
> Does something in the Charter preclude
> a declarative semantics?  I don't know the answer.

No, I don't believe so, and I hope it didn't sound otherwise from my  
comments. I only meant them in re: yr need for quads and claims about  
RDF's obsolescence.

Cheers,
Kendall
Received on Friday, 1 June 2007 00:00:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:14:51 GMT