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

Re: Opinions sought: renaming the dataset protocol to graph store protocol

From: Chimezie Ogbuji <chimezie@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 11:59:16 -0400
Message-ID: <AANLkTimyzxqr7wt=NPZZpQ3b6JxS4CtwU1NBhjzXPHH_@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Cc: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>, sparQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
+1
I think it is a good idea as well. I can make that change now unless
we want to have a formal resolution to do so (in the same way we had
one to make the initial change).

On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 8:51 AM, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-03-23 at 11:56 +0000, Axel Polleres wrote:
>> On 22 Mar 2011, at 16:21, Andy Seaborne wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > On 22/03/11 15:15, Steve Harris wrote:
>> > > I think it's a good idea, the current name is a bit misleading.
>> >
>> > +1
>>
>> +1, likewise
>
> +1, which I sort of said before this thread started.
>
>    - s
>
>>
>> Axel
>>
>> > >
>> > > - Steve
>> > >
>> > > On 2011-03-22, at 14:48, Lee Feigenbaum wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> Based on recent conversations, there has been suggestions that since the dataset protocol is defined against (mutable) graph stores, the name we chose in http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2011-01-25#resolution_3, that we change the name to reflect this.
>> > >>
>> > >> The current name is:
>> > >>
>> > >> SPARQL 1.1 RDF Dataset HTTP Protocol
>> > >>
>> > >> I'd imagine the alternative name would be:
>> > >>
>> > >> SPARQL 1.1 Graph Store HTTP Protocol
>> > >>
>> > >> Please use this thread to express support or concern about this proposed change. We'll make a final decision on the name next Tuesday, and I promise that we won't then revisit it again. :-)
>> > >>
>> > >> Lee
>> > >>
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 23 March 2011 16:00:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:45 GMT