W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org > August 2012

Re: BIND semantics (2)

From: james anderson <james@dydra.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2012 17:01:43 +0200
Message-Id: <A66D5127-E15E-48E2-A556-9257318089F6@dydra.com>
To: SPARQL Comments <public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org>
good afternoon, dr polleres;

On 2012-08-14, at 15:10 , Polleres, Axel wrote:

> P.S.: BTW, also your other comment:
>  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/ 
> 2012Aug/0005.html
> does not seem to ask for a formal reply to the group.
> Is that correct?
> If so, again, we'd appreciate a short note that you don't expect a  
> formal reply.
> BTW, here's a short informal answer: the "Composite Datasets"  
> feature is at
> the moment not under consideration and the Wiki page at
> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:CompositeDatasets just  
> has one possible design draft.
> A concrete design for such a feature will be subject to discussions  
> in a future SPARQL WG,
> but as I mentioned in the reply to David, this feature was left out  
> for this round of SPARQL.

as a thread here made reference to the 'CompositeDatasets' feature  
wiki note, but neither the thread nor the note described any process  
whereby the group would present the issue for consideration, my  
comment was intended to elicit information on that process. in  
particular how one is to comment on the issue. should i understand,  
from your reply above, that no such means exists until the group  
takes the issue up at some point in the future?

best regards, from berlin,
james anderson | james@datagraph.org | james@dydra.com | http:// 
Received on Tuesday, 14 August 2012 14:59:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:52:13 UTC