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

Re: Minor Syntax issues

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 18:39:08 -0600
To: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
Cc: "Seaborne, Andy" <andy.seaborne@hp.com>, Alberto Reggiori <alberto@asemantics.com>, 'RDF Data Access Working Group' <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1108514349.4991.522.camel@localhost>

On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 23:48 +0000, Dave Beckett wrote:
[...]
> 
> 10.4 yes or no
> "Align results to XML results format"
> 
> Did we decide this?  I feel there might be a dropped for me action here 
> somewhere.

I/we neglected to assign actions arising from a number of decisions
in Helsinki, including this one:

"RESOLVED: to add explicit yes/no in result set; keep boolean in
protocol spec; keep ASK syntax and section 10.4 Asking "yes or no"
questions as from v1.33 17-Nov-04 and later version of the QL spec;
DanC, SteveH abstaining."

http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/ftf4.html#item11


I went looking for another one of your actions earlier today,
and found it was overtaken by a WG decision...

"PROPOSED: order in result set is: if SELECT a,b, c then a,b,c; if
SELECT * then unconstrained. so RESOLVED. SteveH abstaining"

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2005JanMar/att-0084/DAWG-Teleconference-1-Feb-2005.html#item06


-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Wednesday, 16 February 2005 00:39:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:22 GMT