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

concrete question on the second erratum in (Re: Process question on "Errata")

From: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 09:52:16 +0200
Message-Id: <EE9D5AE1-2C21-45B0-ADC5-7F181584D26A@deri.org>
To: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Hi all,

I am a bit wondering regarding the result-format URI erratum (item 2 in http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#errata):

A quick "googling" for http://www.w3.org/2005/sparql-results# seems to reveal that this URI has some substantial usage... Is there any way we can allow both http://www.w3.org/2005/sparql-results# and http://www.w3.org/2007/sparql-results# or any other idea how we can tackle existing usage of the 2005 namespace?

Opinions?

Axel




On 27 Jul 2011, at 09:38, Axel Polleres wrote:

> Hi Sandro,
> 
> In the last TC (Action-503,ACTION-504) we had a discussion about the "Errata" for the XML Result format.
> 
> As far as I understand the process [1], we mostly need to just incorporate the relevant points from 
>  http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/SPARQL_Errata#SPARQL_XML_Results
> into 
>   http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/XMLres-errata
> and then approve the Errata changes in the group, to be published.
> 
> However, there's a small tricky part here:
> 
> In fact, one of the Errata affects the published schema files:
> Can we just change those in-place? i.e., can we overwrite some (non-spec) files in the rec space?
> 
> Thanks for clarification,
> 
> Axel
> 
> p.s.: this completes ACTION-503.
> 
> 1. http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#errata
Received on Wednesday, 27 July 2011 07:53:17 GMT

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