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

comments JP-4 how to proceed?

From: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2012 09:54:08 +0100
Message-Id: <6170A0B5-88FC-48BF-A25A-77A74ADFEB4C@deri.org>
To: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Rethinking of the past Telco, and not having read any further discussion on the mailinglist, 
I think that some things became clear in the context of comment JP-4:

Option 1 is not viable, and Option 2 seems to turn out just too late in the game, 
particularly since there is little/no resources to spec it out, even if there was two 
possible implementors (Andy+Matt).

So, unless someone jumps up to spec out the feature by the end of the month, the obvious 
way to proceed seems Option3, i.e. leave things as they are, and put something like ALLPATHS 
or DISTINCT() around paths as a proposal which could be considered on the future_items 
list and send a reply along these lines to JP-4.

Let me know if anyone thinks different.

BTW: As for the related comment JP-5, it seems obvious that not all implementations 
cover the current property-pths semantics uniformly, and that we need to fix this before going to PR.

Received on Tuesday, 21 February 2012 08:55:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:01:06 UTC