W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > October to December 2004

Re: protocol draft available

From: Kendall Clark <kendall@monkeyfist.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 10:49:40 -0500
To: "Seaborne, Andy" <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
Cc: Tom Adams <tom@tucanatech.com>, DAWG list <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>, Kendall Clark <kendall@monkeyfist.com>
Message-ID: <20041122154940.GC4500@monkeyfist.com>

On Mon, Nov 22, 2004 at 02:48:12PM +0000, Seaborne, Andy wrote:

> One real value of having an update language (whether that is querylanguage 
> or a separate language is immaterial), rather than update operations, is 
> the possibility of writing the changes in a document, then referring to the 
> document via RSS.  Operations, even ones that refer to documents, don't fit 
> with RSS very well as they are client-push, not database-pull.

This is a good point.

> Indeed - maybe a way forward is to take just the HTTP+query part and 
> publish as a working draft as soon as possible (before XMas?) and work on 
> the overall architecture separately as it may be beyond this WG's timescale.

I'd be willing (even if personally disappointed) to push forward my
simplex draft if I thought that it had the best chance to reach WG
consensus, which is what I care about more than "being finished ASAP"
(no one has ever offered anything resembling a satisfactory
explanation as to why this WG has acted like a house afire re:
schedule). But I don't understand that that would mean dropping the
abstract protocol bits entirely.

Kendall Clark
Sometimes it's appropriate, even patriotic, to be ashamed
of your country. -- James Howard Kunstler
Received on Monday, 22 November 2004 15:50:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:00:45 UTC