- From: Kendall Clark <kendall@monkeyfist.com>
- Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 10:26:32 -0600
- To: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>, RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On Fri, Nov 26, 2004 at 03:45:58PM +0000, Dave Beckett muttered something about: > I've updated the result formats I did 2004-09-28 described in > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004JulSep/0556.html > to add a <variables> header describing the variable names > as well as a form for returning blank nodes. >From my perspective as a potential protocol document editor, I'd like it if this variable results format could get approved by the WG, so that we can give it a URI identifier. Which I can then use in the protocol doc. At any rate, even if there are some changes that happen to it, it's the only game in town, and I'd be happy to vote on it in an upcoming WG telecon. > Depends on how important schema validation is, I guess. I think it's overrated generally, but especially so here. If it would be useful, I was going to write some Python to process these files into HTML (and/or Python native data structures) using one or two popular Python XML APIs. The more (examples) the merrier (people will be), IMO. Kendall Clark -- You're one in a million You've got to burn to shine
Received on Friday, 26 November 2004 16:26:54 UTC