W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > March 2006

RE: Belated comments on SPARQL Protocol for RDF 25 January 2006 LC WD

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 18:10:05 -0600
To: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org, public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <1142986205.12963.271.camel@dirk.w3.org>

On Fri, 2006-02-17 at 10:32 -0800, Jonathan Marsh wrote:
> The WSDL WG discussed the issues Hugo found below.  See inline.

We passed the Woden validator today.

See details:

wsdl fun (re: ACTION: LeeF to try SPARQL WSDL files with Woden
validator, report results.) Lee Feigenbaum (Tuesday, 21 March)
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2006JanMar/thread.html#msg469

In particular, this WSDL file:

http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/proto-wd/sparql-protocol-query.wsdl
 1.18 2006/03/21 19:18:07

I hope it's good enough. We did not change maxOccurs nor the name thing,
but indications I'm getting are that the WSD WG is OK with that.

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Wednesday, 22 March 2006 00:10:20 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:39 GMT