W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > July to September 2010

Re: Tuesday's agenda

From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 22:07:01 +0100
Message-ID: <4CA10775.6080002@epimorphics.com>
To: Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>
CC: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Greg's message [1] had comments on federated query (separated out into 
[2]).  I'm not what is the most appropriate way to proceed on the 
non-editorial comments, e.g. the comment on informal style.


[[These do not need to be done this week as they are
not roadblock on publication as far as I'm aware but should not be 
forgotten]]

Parametrization vs join semantics for BINDINGs. [3], [4].

isNumeric proposal[5].

	Andy

[1] federated query comments
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0422.html
[2]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0433.html

[3] BINDINGs
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0369.html
[4]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0370.html

[5] isNumeric
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0410.html



On 26/09/10 01:37, Lee Feigenbaum wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> Thanks for all the great reviews.
>
> On Tuesday, we'll check in with all of the reviewers and editors to see
> if we're ready to decide on publication, either with or without pending
> changes.
>
> So if you're a reviewer, please come prepared to state whether or not
> you think the document is ready for publication as a not-yet-last-call
> Working Draft. If you're an editor, please let me know if the reviews
> have brought up any specific issues that need WG time, as it's very easy
> for me to miss those when looking over the reviews.
>
> thanks!
> Lee
>
Received on Monday, 27 September 2010 21:08:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:43 GMT