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

Re: Proposed: SPARQL grammar is complete as-is

From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 11:37:34 +0000
Cc: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <FF928A2E-3B40-4B9D-8E31-D5DD77ACE8DE@garlik.com>
To: Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>
On 2010-12-23, at 11:34, Lee Feigenbaum wrote:
...
>> No, I just didn't want to put any significant effort into checking it over pre-freeze if I was looking at the wrong version. I've not really been following the grammar, it's not my area, and Garlik's grammar maven is on holiday.
> 
> Right, understood. Maybe I ought to have said "syntax" rather than "grammar" -- the point I'm getting at is whether or not -- in spirit if not to the last byte of the grammar -- we're at a point where we've reached consensus on SPARQL 1.1 syntax issues.

OK, I see. Yes, I think we've stopped digging.

- Steve

-- 
Steve Harris, CTO, Garlik Limited
1-3 Halford Road, Richmond, TW10 6AW, UK
+44 20 8439 8203  http://www.garlik.com/
Registered in England and Wales 535 7233 VAT # 849 0517 11
Registered office: Thames House, Portsmouth Road, Esher, Surrey, KT10 9AD
Received on Thursday, 23 December 2010 11:38:08 GMT

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