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

Re: some options for issues#rdfSemantics

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 01:18:37 -0400
Message-Id: <e2353d9ef4edd70a9bb19367dc31588e@isr.umd.edu>
Cc: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>

On Oct 17, 2005, at 2:51 PM, Dan Connolly wrote:

>  I just updated the entry for rdfSemantics in the issues list. I'ts as 
> neutral as I can manage. Please try to prepare for straw polls on 
> these 3 options tomorrow:

Good summary!

I haven't reviewed the test cases for impact, but shall do so, 
er...right now!

SteveH's thing is called 3Store.

Looking at:
	http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/tests/README.html

I'm surprised that even non construct queries are specified as rdf 
graphs...I would have thought that they'd be specified in terms of the 
canonical results format. Granted this makes things a little tougher 
for the "optional redundancy" position, but not that much harder. But 
maybe I'm missing something.

Cheers,
Bijan.
Received on Tuesday, 18 October 2005 05:18:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:24 GMT