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

Re: what functions should we include in SPARQL 1.1?

From: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 07:24:15 +0800
Cc: "SPARQL Working Group" <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <D21F4900-7607-4816-9173-A15A9E0AAF78@deri.org>
To: "Andy Seaborne" <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>

On 10 Nov 2010, at 04:02, Andy Seaborne wrote:

> 
> 
> On 09/11/10 17:42, Axel Polleres wrote:
> >>>    which we may want to reuse, or should we uniformly refer to the
> >>>
> >>>       http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql-functions#
> >>>
> >>>    for all functions (also the xs: ones?
> >>
> >> Reuse where possible.
> >
> > Remembering that we had this discussion partly before, one argument against reuse and for uniformly using a single
> > namespace was that this single namespace would indicate exactly the interchangeable functions within the SPARQL1.1 spec
> > and that these functions then would be usable without a namespace prefix as simple keywords of the language.
> 
> Must have missed that - I don't recall a proposal to make the names
> keywords in the language for all mandatory functions from F&O - is the
> proposal to add new keywords for all required functions, then map to
> IRIs (sparqlfn:) and owl:sameAs to fn:.

that'd work for me.

Axel

> 
>         Andy
> 
> PS
> http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=0AkNZYESXv3IndGwyRkRXZ2hES0RjM0c3MHhLa05vTmc&gid=0
> 
Received on Tuesday, 9 November 2010 23:24:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:44 GMT