W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > April to June 2011

Re: json result format --> new charter !?

From: Paul Gearon <pgearon@revelytix.com>
Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 10:51:53 -0400
Message-ID: <BANLkTimVx+HDmNBLUgOdxdWK_H4nmR6cCg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
Cc: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
I agree with Andy. The spec isn't doing its job if most people eschew
the formal part of the specification in favor of a Note. (A situation
which I'm starting to see already)

What exactly is needed right now? I think I can spare a little time
for the next week.

Paul Gearon

On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 10:24 AM, Andy Seaborne
<andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com> wrote:
> I'd prefer to publish as a REC, especially given the increased importance of
> """
> Serializing SPARQL Query Results in JSON, new version, Working Group Note.
> """
> can be understood as Working Group Note referring to to current-at-charter
> status.
> How much work is it?
>        Andy
> Isn't a REC a subclass of Note ? :-)
> On 24/05/11 21:40, Sandro Hawke wrote:
>> In a minor procedural disaster, it turns out the SPARQL Charter says
>>  Deliverables:
>>    ...
>>     Serializing SPARQL Query Results in JSON, new version, Working Group
>> Note.
>>  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> We can probably amend the charter to fix this fairly easily.   We could
>> perhaps even start the process, getting a new charter out for AC
>> review, this week.   Any strong opinions either way?
>> My own feeling is that given where we are in the process, we should
>> just leave it as a Note; I don't think implementors will avoid
>> implementing this just because it's a Note, if we link it from all the
>> right places.   And we can circulate it to get it as much review as we
>> need.   You'll have to judge for yourself whether the patent protection
>> is important.
>> I might be biased by wanting to avoid work, though.  If you think it's
>> important to have this be a Rec, please speak up now.
>>    -- Sandro
Received on Thursday, 26 May 2011 14:52:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:01:04 UTC