Re: disjunction, query language, data representation ...

Don Cohen wrote:

> Are comments still solicited?  Is work ongoing?  Where are comments
> and other discussions recorded?  I'm just exploring this content for
> the first time but have long experience with what I consider to be
> a better design.  [see http://ap5.com/doc/ap5-man.html]
> Union is part of this design.  Null value (unbound/optional) is not.

Comments on the SPARQL set of specifications are still welcome and yes, 
work is still ongoing. Be advised though that we are chewing through a 
bit of an e-mail backlog so responses to comments by the working group 
may take some time.

This mailinglist is the appropriate place for feedback to the Data 
Access Working Group, specifically regarding the current SPARQL specs 
(protocol, query language, and result format). For discussion/more 
general issues, I think the Semantic Web mailinglist 
(http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/) is a good place.

The Working Group's internal discussion mailinglist is publicly 
available (read-only) as well, archives at 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/.

> On a higher level, I'd argue that n-ary relations save a lot of
> trouble (most of the anonymous objects) over triples.  The design
> of ap5 also unifies filters with data.  I would be happy to learn
> where I could discuss these and other similar issues.

I think the Semantic Web list I mentioned is a good place for further 
discussion on this.

Regards,

Jeen
-- 
Jeen Broekstra          Aduna BV
Knowledge Engineer      Julianaplein 14b, 3817 CS Amersfoort
http://aduna.biz        The Netherlands
tel. +31 33 46599877

Received on Wednesday, 23 November 2005 12:06:34 UTC