W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > January to March 2006

Re: Editorial thread for BGP matching

From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 13:26:07 -0600
Message-Id: <p06230905bff6e633ab67@[10.100.0.23]>
To: "Seaborne, Andy" <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
Cc: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>

>Please put text changes on this thread to reduce the risk of them 
>getting lost.
>

If its any consolation to anyone, I'm now the one who is feeling 
overwhelmed. I have to focus on non-WG stuff for the rest of today, 
but I'll do you a version with the simplified definitions before 
Tuesday, for comparison.

Pat

PS. I agree with the separate document idea for the non-SPARQL stuff. 
We could also discuss things like told-bnodes in there as SPARQL 
variations. But then the SPARQL definitions should not even mention 
the scoping set B: all we need is the scoping graph being a bnode 
variant of G which should be standardized apart from all the BGPs and 
which defines the scope of the answer set.
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC		(850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   home
40 South Alcaniz St.	(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola			(850)202 4440   fax
FL 32502			(850)291 0667    cell
phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Friday, 20 January 2006 19:26:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:25 GMT