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

Re: fed review

From: Carlos Buil Aranda <cbuil@fi.upm.es>
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2011 10:58:31 -0400
Message-ID: <CABdcz9HUHsQ9+J35+akz+xo38Gz0whos3UDKy53Zs1r3-dK2FQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>
Cc: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>, Gregory Williams <greg@evilfunhouse.com>, SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
if we do not include it now, could it be possible to include it later on,
after last call?

Carlos

2011/7/20 Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>

> On 7/20/2011 10:14 AM, Steve Harris wrote:
>
>> On 2011-07-20, at 03:57, Lee Feigenbaum wrote:
>>
>>> So, the possible solutions are:
>>>>  - For the SERVICE VAR semantics
>>>>    - add a new operation that could allow the evaluation (operation
>>>> which wouldn't be bottom-up)
>>>>    - define its whole semantics in a new way
>>>>  - For the boundedness restriction
>>>>   - specify all cases: it may take a bit long
>>>>   - remove it? I do not think this is a good idea, how do we specify
>>>> then that a variable is bound (which is needed for the evaluation
>>>> semantics of SERVICE VAR)?
>>>>
>>>> something missing? any other option?
>>>>
>>>
>>> As someone who was a bit uncomfortable including it in the first place,
>>> I'll add another, dramatic option: remove SERVICE VAR from the specification
>>> altogether.
>>>
>>
>> That sounds like a good, pragmatic solution, but it would require a second
>> Last Call, no?
>>
>
> Given that we haven't yet published Last Call for this document, no. :-)
>
> Lee
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 20 July 2011 14:59:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:46 GMT