- From: Richard Newman <r.newman@reading.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 16:04:51 -0800
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: Fred Zemke <fred.zemke@oracle.com>, public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
Understood, though I do refer to the 'experience' argument -- I'm implementing precisely this now, so I thought I'd share my professional views on the subject. I did not intend to appear to be representing the WG, and I apologise if that impression was given. I shall be more circumspect in future. Thanks, -R On 12 Jan 2006, at 15:42, Dan Connolly wrote: > On Thu, 2006-01-12 at 14:57 -0800, Richard Newman wrote: >> I'd call this utterly outside of the scope of SPARQL. >> >> Fine-grained privilege control for RDF is a hard, largely-unsolved >> problem. > > This mailing list is mostly for discussion between > commentors and the working group. It's useful when you > add factual information or experience, but the Working Group > has a process obligation to formally address Fred's last > call comments (and all other last call comments), and when you > add your own personal argument, it may mislead Fred into thinking > that yours is a position of, or argument from, the Working Group. > > Feel free to send comments of your own, but please be very > conservative > in responding to other comments.
Received on Friday, 13 January 2006 00:04:53 UTC