- From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
- Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 21:34:56 +0100
- To: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Ping? - Steve On 2011-02-15, at 17:15, Steve Harris wrote: > Agreed, that's better, so is everyone happy with http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/CommentResponse:GK-1 as it stands now? > > - Steve > > On 2011-02-15, at 16:13, Axel Polleres wrote: > >> I have added a sentence on the ISSUE we added and that we might not be able to address this >> in the draft response at >> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/CommentResponse:GK-1 >> I'd suggest to answer now, rather than wait until we know whether we resolve the issue. >> >> Axel >> >> On 14 Feb 2011, at 11:23, Steve Harris wrote: >> >>> On 2011-02-14, at 10:59, Axel Polleres wrote: >>> >>>> Related to the issue of ORDER in GROUP_CONCAT we had a mail thread starting at >>>> >>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010OctDec/0041.html >>>> >>>> and ending at >>>> >>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2010Oct/0001.html >>>> >>>> ... this was then discussed in the TC on 2010-10-26: >>>> >>>> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-10-26#line0100 >>>> >>>> there we had a strawpoll on whether or not we want an order feature in GROUP_CONCAT... >>>> >>>> Options for group_concat: 1) no order_by 2) simple order_by 3) full ordering by expressions (e.g. order by second letter of a word, etc.) >>>> >>>> where a clear majority voted for 1), mainly because of concerns that anything else would not be doable with the remaining time/resources. >>>> >>>> As far as I understand, what is now being discussed is 3), correct? Back in october, no one voted for 3). >>>> Unless someone thinks we have substantial new information, I think we should stick with this position. >>>> >>>> BTW: I just see that, on IRC, in that TC, Steve suggested to make a postponed issue out of it: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-10-26#line0133 but so far we haven't added it as an issue. >>> >>> Right, I see this comment as further evidence that it's worth a (postponed) issue. >>> >>> - 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 >>> >>> >> > > -- > 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 > > -- 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 Tuesday, 19 April 2011 20:35:26 UTC