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

Re: Minor Syntax issues

From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 16:26:19 +0000
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Cc: "Seaborne, Andy" <andy.seaborne@hp.com>, Alberto Reggiori <alberto@asemantics.com>, 'RDF Data Access Working Group' <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1108571179.5025.29.camel@hoth.ilrt.bris.ac.uk>

On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 18:39 -0600, Dan Connolly wrote:
> 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

OK, noted, will think about it.

> 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

I updated the editor's draft of the VBR last night to add the latter.
Changed 2.2 of
 http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rf1/
 CVS 1.17+

Dave
Received on Wednesday, 16 February 2005 16:26:36 GMT

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