- From: Polleres, Axel <axel.polleres@siemens.com>
- Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 09:08:25 +0200
- To: "lee@thefigtrees.net" <lee@thefigtrees.net>, "cbuilaranda@gmail.com" <cbuilaranda@gmail.com>
- CC: "public-rdf-dawg@w3.org" <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Looks ok (shall we - independent of the reply - add this to the Future work items list?) Axel > -----Original Message----- > From: Lee Feigenbaum [mailto:figtree@gmail.com] On Behalf Of > Lee Feigenbaum > Sent: Dienstag, 02. Oktober 2012 19:43 > To: Carlos Buil Aranda > Cc: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > Subject: Re: draft response to Peter Wharer 2 > > I made some small edits. It's ok with me as is. > > Anyone else? > > Lee > > On 10/2/2012 1:37 PM, Carlos Buil Aranda wrote: > > Hi Lee, > > > > I updated the response. > > > > cheers, > > > > Carlos > > > > On Tuesday 02 October 2012 13:29:03 Lee Feigenbaum wrote: > >> Hi Carlos, > >> > >> I don't think that we have consensus that we would want a way to > > specify > >> the dataset for a SERVICE call, so I would weaken that > part of your > >> response a bit. Perhaps you could say something like that > the group > >> opted for the current design for simplicity, and hopes to > learn more > >> about how datasets interact with federated query from > implementation > >> experience in order to inform future standardization? > >> > >> Lee > >> > >> On 10/2/2012 11:59 AM, Carlos Buil Aranda wrote: > >>> Dear all, > >>> > >>> here you can find a drafted response for Peter Warer: > >>> > >>> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/CommentResponse:PW2 > >>> > >>> cheers, > >>> > >>> Carlos > > >
Received on Wednesday, 3 October 2012 07:08:54 UTC