- From: Gregory Williams <greg@evilfunhouse.com>
- Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2010 13:15:46 -0400
- To: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
- Cc: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On Jul 13, 2010, at 2:41 AM, Steve Harris wrote: > I don't think that we should try and gracefully handle situations where people assert nonsense in other graphs, that's just opening can of worms. Agreed. It seems Damian has now retracted[1] his entailment issue, so I think the consensus here is that it's a non-issue. Sandro's issues -- the naming of sd:name and the modeling of the named graphs in the service description -- are still open, though. .greg [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2010Jul/0007.html
Received on Wednesday, 14 July 2010 17:16:15 UTC