W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > April to June 2012

RE: Tomorrow's SPARQL meeting at risk

From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 09:13:32 -0400
To: "Polleres, Axel" <axel.polleres@siemens.com>
Cc: Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>, SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <1335273212.9663.35.camel@waldron>
On Mon, 2012-04-23 at 20:53 +0200, Polleres, Axel wrote:
> > Axel, are we still waiting on you for Overview? 
> 
> Overview is ready to go from my side and had one review from Matt.
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012JanMar/0225.html
> 
> My resp. mail on that is here:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012JanMar/0275.html
> and had some questions to the group on references.
> 
> It would be good if these were (at least briefly discussed) in the light of whether 
> there's anything that keeps the doc from going to LC, particularly the refernces to Turtle and to the 
> "Using SPARQL1.1 with RDF1.1" document.
> 
> If nobody thinks these are showstoppers, from my side we can go to LC, even without a second review.

I skimmed the document, and it looks okay to me, except for the obvious
@@@ items around references.  I've proposed strawman solutions to each
of these, just now:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012AprJun/0058.html

> >  And do you still want
> > CSV and GSP to wait for Overview?    (please correct me if I'm mistaken
> > in my memory of those dependencies.)
> 
> Not necessarily, also fine to publish these two now and wait with Overview until Query is ready.

I'm thinking we can resolve to publish Overview today.   My inclination
is to not wait for Query.

    -- Sandro
Received on Tuesday, 24 April 2012 13:13:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:48 GMT