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

valueTesting optional and error cases

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2005 19:45:28 -0500
To: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1122165928.7049.386.camel@localhost>

A while ago, I wrote about...

 specifying extended valueTesting without reference to implementations
 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2005AprJun/0107

but I eventually let it go.

Bjoern Hoehrmann commented on it in...
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2005Jul/0032.html

so let's take another look.

I can think of a few cases:
  - user-defined functions/operators
  - calling functions with args outside the domain

I still think we should make no reference to "implementations" in the QL
spec; just specify the semantics of the language. I'd like to keep
software conformance issues out of the QL spec and in the protocol spec.

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Sunday, 24 July 2005 00:45:34 GMT

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