- From: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
- Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2010 00:30:10 +0000
- To: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
I am fine with publication of this document in its current form. Here some more general comment not intended for resolution for this WD but in the future: * Instances: sd:SPARQLQuery sd:SPARQLUpdate indicate the supported language, but no version. How shall I advertise that only query1.0 is supported? (question is also whether we want that but it might make sense to advertise only a fragment of the language) * As for Alex' comment: > BTW, as a matter of personal taste, instead having these as sentences, esp. for long ones as > for "sd:defaultEntailmentRegime is an rdfs:subPropertyOf sd:feature. The rdfs:domain of > sd:defaultEntailmentRegime is sd:Service. The rdfs:range of sd:defaultEntailmentRegime is > sd:EntailmentRegime.", it might be better to have RDF code for each of these descriptions. Hmm, shouldn't we rather strive to publish an RDF Schema document alongside with the document (in the next draft)? Axel
Received on Tuesday, 5 January 2010 00:30:44 UTC