W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > October to December 2009

Re: Alternative Syntaxes for BGPs

From: Kendall Clark <kendall@clarkparsia.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 13:08:14 -0400
Message-ID: <1fc9c2ff0910301008ofcd08e4o32977bbb2a7ca8b4@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Cc: "Seaborne, Andy" <andy.seaborne@hp.com>, Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>, Birte Glimm <birte.glimm@comlab.ox.ac.uk>, SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 1:04 PM, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org> wrote:

> I do think a member submission is technically doable, as long as the
> SPARQL WG declares the work to be out of scope.

My org wouldn't support doing this as a member submission, FWIW. It's
just not that scale of thing, IMO.

> But the normal approach, I think, would be for someone to prepare it and
> show it the WG, and if the WG says "sorry, we don't have time to
> actually work on this right now" (or they just don't want to), then they
> publish it as a WG note.  For example, as I recall this is what happened
> with LBase [1] in RDF Core and OWL 1 XML [2] in WebOnt.

And with SPARQL Results in JSON.

It would be ideal, though, if we could avoid prejudging this as DOA,
at least before it actually arrives. :>

Cheers,
Kendall
Received on Friday, 30 October 2009 17:09:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:40 GMT