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:

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.

Received on Tuesday, 18 October 2005 05:18:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:00:49 UTC