- From: Richard Newman <r.newman@reading.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 15:25:07 -0800
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
Dan, I would perhaps be inclined to include the word 'generic': "Possible generic mechanisms for..." Otherwise, that seems like enough of a reference for me. I'll let Patrick shepherd this issue, of course. -R On 17 Feb 2006, at 14:27, Dan Connolly wrote: > > Apologies for the delay in responding... > > On Tue, 2005-11-15 at 17:30 -0600, Patrick Stickler wrote: > [...] >> I would be happy to work with the DAWG to include coverage >> of CBDs as a recommended, albeit optional, form of description >> in SPARQL; even in a non-normative appendix of the recommendation. >> The existing W3C Member Submission for CBDs would offer a good >> starting point. > > We added this text: > > [[ > Other possible mechanisms for deciding what information to return > include Concise Bounded Descriptions [CBD]. > > ... > > [CBD] > CBD - Concise Bounded Description, Patrick Stickler, Nokia, > W3C > Member Submission, 3 June 2005. > ]] > -- http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/#describe > > Leo, Richard, Patrick, please let us know whether this is a > satisfactory response to this comment.
Received on Friday, 17 February 2006 23:25:32 UTC