On Thu, 2005-03-24 at 14:12 -0500, Thompson, Bryan B. wrote: > Dan, > > I am in favor of re-opening this issue. I think that Bob has made > several very good points and there is pretty consistent input from > the comments list that we need to respect traditional semantics for > core operators (AND, OR, NOT). > > >From our own experience using SPARQL prototypes, we spend a lot of > time re-writing queries that require disjunction using an combination > of AND and NOT. Can you please say why you want to do with re-opening this issue - what points does Bob raise that make you want to change the current state, as I am not clear. It's currently a closed issue - in the sparql query language as UNION, over my objection - I wanted it out. DaveReceived on Thursday, 24 March 2005 20:44:38 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 1 October 2009 14:42:01 GMT