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

Re: comments on SPARQL QL, protocol, rf1, tests, requirements from outside the WG

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 21:03:20 -0400
Message-Id: <D38FD8F4-ABB7-11D9-A697-0003936A0B26@isr.umd.edu>
Cc: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>

On Apr 12, 2005, at 4:50 PM, Dan Connolly wrote:

>  In post-telcon discussion, I told Andy that I'd answered many of the 
> comments, and I'd tell him which ones I have not answered. So here's a 
> list, in roughly newest-first order, back to about 23 March. I presume 
> the 31 March
[snip]

I'm v. overtired, but I've seen no mention of the many issues I've 
raised with regard to the formal bits, including the fact that I 
believe, at the moment, that any bnodes in the query graph will make 
the query fail.

Are these all considered editorial? If so, I'd like some mention of 
that fact, and an indication that they've been dispatched to the 
editors.

I would also like to know the normative status of various bits of the 
spec. Which trumps, definitions or main body text?

Cheers,
Bijan.
Received on Wednesday, 13 April 2005 01:03:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:23 GMT