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

preparing for protocol discussion

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 16:56:17 -0600
To: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1109285777.12629.121.camel@localhost>

Re "SPARQL Protocol for RDF editor's drft @@to be provided by Wed, 23
Feb"
 -- http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/ftf5-bos.html#rdl

Kendall called me to let me know that continued illness etc.
messed up plans to have a new draft for review yesterday.

He may have some time this weekend. I don't expect everybody to
read whatever he comes up with overnight, so we'll use the W3C
Working Draft 14 January 2005 as the starting-page for the
ftf meeting...
  http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-rdf-sparql-protocol-20050114/
which is, aside from title page decoration, the same as
the current editor's draft...
1.15 http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/proto-wd/

But in any case... if you have protocol thoughts and
have been waiting for a new draft before sharing them,
please don't wait any longer.

In particular, these threads:

 Some protocol & service description issues 
 Kendall Clark (Tuesday, 25 January)
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2005JanMar/0046.html

 SPARQL Protocol for RDF / feedback (fwd) Dirk-Willem van
Gulik (Thursday, 20 January)
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2005JanMar/0035.html

 ACTION SteveH: Write up a service description of features supported for
his service
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2005JanMar/0113.html

 LOAD, FROM, GRAPH and COFFEE 
 Eric Prud'hommeaux (Thursday, 27 January)

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2005JanMar/0067.html


Andy, EricP, Dave, Steve, you guys have protocol implementations, right?
I'm particularly interested in
  - any difference between what you've implemented and what's
    in WD-rdf-sparql-protocol-20050114

  - anything in your own design/implementation/service that
    feels unresolved

  - what you think is the right amount of service description stuff
    to try to standardize


-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Thursday, 24 February 2005 22:56:19 GMT

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