- From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 19:41:04 +0000
- To: nathan@webr3.org
- Cc: RDF Working Group WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Hi Nathan, Here is a link to our charter: http://www.w3.org/2011/01/rdf-wg-charter You know that this WG exists solely to deliver the items listed in its charter. Nothing more and nothing less. On 10 Mar 2011, at 16:16, Nathan wrote: > it appears that the two things you passionately want to see this WG to provide, is a turtle like format for dumping out RDF Datasets, and a JSON format for dumping out CONSTRUCT and DESCRIBE sparql results. In the area of syntax, the charter requires us to deliver two features: Turtle, including (perhaps a separate syntax) support for “multiple graphs or graph stores”; and a JSON syntax for RDF. > Why here and not the SPARQL WG? I want this WG to deliver the things it was chartered to produce, in a way that supports the people and organisations that work with RDF, and avoids risky design adventures that we might regret in a few years. Best, Richard > > Best, > > Nathan
Received on Thursday, 10 March 2011 19:41:51 UTC