public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org from January 2006 by date

Tuesday, 31 January 2006

• Re: [OK?] Re: SPARQL Protocol: suboptimal examples Kendall Clark
• Re: [OK?] Re: SPARQL Protocol: suboptimal examples Dan Connolly

Monday, 30 January 2006

• Re: [OK?] Re: SPARQL: Error handling Kendall Clark
• Re: [OK?] Re: SPARQL: Error handling Dan Connolly
• Re: [OK?] Re: SPARQL: Error handling Kendall Clark
• Re: [OK?] Re: SPARQL: Error handling Kendall Clark
• Re: [OK?] Re: SPARQL: Error handling Dan Connolly
• Re: [OK?] Re: SPARQL: Error handling Kendall Clark
• Re: [OK?] Re: SPARQL: Error handling Dan Connolly

Sunday, 29 January 2006

• Re: [OK?] Re: SPARQL: Error handling Kendall Clark
• Re: [OK?] Re: SPARQL: Error handling Kendall Clark
• Re: [OK?] Re: SPARQL: Error handling Bjoern Hoehrmann
• Re: [OK?] Re: SPARQL: Error handling Dan Connolly
• Re: [OK?] Re: SPARQL: Error handling Bjoern Hoehrmann
• Re: [OK?] Re: SPARQL: Error handling Dan Connolly
• Re: [OK?] Re: SPARQL Protocol: suboptimal examples Bjoern Hoehrmann
• Re: [OK?] Re: SPARQL Protocol: suboptimal examples Kendall Clark
• Re: [OK?] Re: SPARQL Protocol: suboptimal examples Bjoern Hoehrmann
• [OK?] Re: SPARQL Protocol: suboptimal examples Kendall Clark
• Re: SPARQL: incorrect/confusing example in 9.3 [CLOSED] Lee Feigenbaum
• Re: SPARQL: Backslashes in string literals [CLOSED] Lee Feigenbaum
• Re: SPARQL: incorrect/confusing example in 9.3 Bjoern Hoehrmann
• Re: SPARQL: Backslashes in string literals [OK?] Bjoern Hoehrmann
• Re: [OK?] Re: SPARQL Protocol: suboptimal examples Bjoern Hoehrmann
• Re: [OK?] Re: SPARQL: Error handling Bjoern Hoehrmann
• Re: SPARQL: W3C QA Guidelines conformance Bjoern Hoehrmann
• Re: [OK?] Re: SPARQL: BASE IRI resolution Bjoern Hoehrmann
• Re: [OK?] Re: SPARQL: format based on Unicode? Bjoern Hoehrmann
• Re: [OK?] Re: SPARQL: isURI poorly named Bjoern Hoehrmann

Thursday, 26 January 2006

• Re: Use Case for DESCRIBE [OK?] Axel Rauschmayer
• Re: Use Case for DESCRIBE [CLOSED?] Dan Connolly
• [CLOSED] Re: SPARQL and Unicode versions Eric Prud'hommeaux
• [OK?] Re: SPARQL: format based on Unicode? Eric Prud'hommeaux
• Re: [OK?] Re: SPARQL and Unicode versions Dave Beckett
• [OK?] Re: SPARQL and Unicode versions Eric Prud'hommeaux

Wednesday, 25 January 2006

• [OK?] Re: minor technical on 11.2.1 Invocation Eric Prud'hommeaux
• Re: minor technical on 11.2.1 Invocation Eric Prud'hommeaux
• [closed] Re: Incorrect braces in Sparql test cases [OK?] Ian Davis
• Re: major technical: no subqueries [OK?] Dan Connolly
• Re: minor technical: are periods separators or terminators? [OK?] Dan Connolly
• Re: major technical: dateTime arithmetic [OK?] Dan Connolly
• Re: major technical: no privilege model [OK?] Dan Connolly
• Re: Use Case for DESCRIBE [OK?] Dan Connolly
• Re: Incorrect braces in Sparql test cases [OK?] Dan Connolly

Tuesday, 24 January 2006

• Re: major technical: no aggregates [OK?] Dan Connolly

Friday, 20 January 2006

• Re: URI serialization issues Andreas Sewe

Monday, 23 January 2006

• Re: minor technical comments on A.4 Comments [OK?] Seaborne, Andy
• Re: minor technical on 10.4.3 Description of resources [OK?] Seaborne, Andy
• Re: minor technical on A.3 Keywords [OK?] Seaborne, Andy
• Re: HTTP Status Codes for QueryRequestRefused [OK?] Kendall Clark
• Re: HTTP Status Codes for QueryRequestRefused [OK?] Dan Connolly
• Grammar updated to reflect BGP/Constraint interpretation Seaborne, Andy

Thursday, 19 January 2006

• Questions on the Sparql marcos rebelo
• Re: URI serialization issues Mark Baker
• Re: URI serialization issues Dan Connolly
• Re: URI serialization issues Kendall Clark

Wednesday, 18 January 2006

• Re: URI serialization issues Mark Baker
• Re: URI serialization issues Kendall Clark
• Re: URI serialization issues Mark Baker
• [CLOSED] Re: Common variables across multiple optional blocks [OK?] Ian Davis
• Re: [OK?] Re: Section 3 of SPARQL protocol partially out of scope. Kendall Clark
• Re: [OK?] Re: SPARQL Protocol Spec Examples Leigh Dodds
• Re: URI serialization issues Kendall Clark
• Re: Common variables across multiple optional blocks [OK?] Seaborne, Andy
• Re: [OK?] Re: Section 3 of SPARQL protocol partially out of scope. Thomas Roessler
• Re: URI serialization issues Mark Baker
• Re: [CLOSED] Re: [CLOSED] Re: BASE absolute IRIs Eric Prud'hommeaux

Tuesday, 17 January 2006

• [OK?] Re: SPARQL Protocol: suboptimal examples Kendall Clark
• [OK?] Re: Section 3 of SPARQL protocol partially out of scope. Kendall Clark
• [OK?] Re: Double binding of a WSDL 2.0 operation Kendall Clark
• [OK?] Re: SPARQL Protocol Spec Examples Kendall Clark
• Common variables across multiple optional blocks Ian Davis
• Re: HTTP Status Codes for QueryRequestRefused Kendall Clark
• [OK?] Re: [comments] SPARQL Protocol against QA SpecGL ICS Kendall Clark
• [OK?] Re: [comments] typo and general Kendall Clark
• [OK?] Re: Comments on SPARQL protocol document Kendall Clark
• Re: [OK?] Re: Comments on SPARQL protocol document Kendall Clark
• [OK?] Re: Comments on SPARQL protocol document Kendall Clark
• Re: URI serialization issues Kendall Clark
• Re: URI serialization issues Kendall Clark
• Re: minor technical on 10.2 Selecting variables [OK?] Seaborne, Andy
• Re: URI serialization issues Kendall Clark
• URI serialization issues Mark Baker
• [CLOSED] Re: [CLOSED] Re: BASE absolute IRIs Benjamin Nowack
• Re: minor technical on A.3 Keywords Seaborne, Andy
• Re: minor technical on 10.4.3 Description of resources Seaborne, Andy
• Re: minor technical comments on A.4 Comments Seaborne, Andy
• Re: minor technical: are variable names case insensitive? [OK?] Seaborne, Andy
• Re: [CLOSED] Re: BASE absolute IRIs Richard Newman
• [OK?] Re: BASE absolute IRIs Eric Prud'hommeaux

Monday, 16 January 2006

• Incorrect braces in Sparql test cases Ian Davis

Saturday, 14 January 2006

• Use Case for DESCRIBE Axel Rauschmayer

Friday, 13 January 2006

• Re: minor technical: are periods separators or terminators? Dan Connolly
• Re: major technical: no privilege model Richard Newman

Thursday, 12 January 2006

• Re: minor technical comment on 2.1.3 Syntax of variables [OK?] Dan Connolly
• Re: major technical: no privilege model Dan Connolly
• Re: major technical: no aggregates Dan Connolly
• Re: minor technical comment on 2.1.3 Syntax of variables Richard Newman
• Re: major technical: no subqueries Dan Connolly
• Re: minor technical on 9 Specifying RDF datasets Richard Newman
• Re: minor technical on 10.2 Selecting variables Richard Newman
• Re: major technical: orthogonality (expressions in SELECT, ORDER BY) [OK?] Dan Connolly
• Re: major technical: no privilege model Richard Newman
• Re: major technical: blank nodes [OK?] Dan Connolly
• Re: major technical: blank nodes Richard Newman
• major technical: no privilege model Fred Zemke
• major technical: dateTime arithmetic Fred Zemke
• major technical: no aggregates Fred Zemke
• major technical: no subqueries Fred Zemke
• major technical: orthogonality Fred Zemke
• major technical: underspecified errors Fred Zemke
• major technical: blank nodes Fred Zemke
• major technical: runaway queries Fred Zemke
• major technical: semantics are poorly specified Fred Zemke
• Re: editorial comments on SPARQL Query Lanuage for RDF Dan Connolly
• editorial comments on SPARQL Query Lanuage for RDF Fred Zemke
• minor technical: omissions from Appendix B Conformance Fred Zemke
• minor technical: A.7 grammar, rule [25] Constraint Fred Zemke
• minor technical: are periods separators or terminators? Fred Zemke
• minor technical comments on A.4 Comments Fred Zemke
• minor technical: are variable names case insensitive? Fred Zemke
• minor technical on A.3 Keywords Fred Zemke
• minor technical on 11.2.2 Effective boolean value Fred Zemke
• minor technical on 11.2.1 Invocation Fred Zemke
• minor technical on 10.4.3 Description of resources Fred Zemke
• minor technical on 10.3 Constructing an output graph Fred Zemke
• minor technical on 10.2 Selecting variables Fred Zemke
• minor technical on 10.1 Solution sequences and result forms Fred Zemke
• minor technical on 9 Specifying RDF datasets Fred Zemke
• minor technical on 5.4 Optional matching - formal definition Fred Zemke
• minor technical comment on 2.1.3 Syntax of variables Fred Zemke
• [OK?] Re: Minor editorial issues for WD-rdf-sparql-protocol-20050914 Kendall Clark
• Re: HTTP response code discussion Mark Baker
• Major technical comment: identifier length Fred Zemke

Wednesday, 11 January 2006

• Re: HTTP response code discussion Kendall Clark
• HTTP response code discussion Mark Baker
• Re: SPARQL DESCRIBE (Personal comments) [OK?] [objection] Dan Connolly
• [closed]: Protocol erratum Dan Connolly
• [closed]: Query By Reference in SPARQL Protocol Dan Connolly
• Re: [Ok?] Re: Wrong SOAP namespace Kendall Clark
• Re: [OK?] Seaborne, Andy
• [public-rdf-dawg-comments] <none> Faisal.Alkhateeb@inrialpes.fr
• Re: [Ok?] Re: Wrong SOAP namespace Hugo Haas

Tuesday, 10 January 2006

• Re: Suspicious mismatch between SPARQL grammar rules and examples [OK?] Seaborne, Andy
• Suspicious mismatch between SPARQL grammar rules and examples Ivan Mikhailov

Monday, 9 January 2006

• SPARQL DESCRIBE (Personal comments) Jacco van Ossenbruggen
• Re: QName production in SPARQL grammar [OK?] Dan Connolly
• Re: sparql describe - options?! [OK?] Seaborne, Andy
• Re: sparql describe - options?! Seaborne, Andy

Sunday, 8 January 2006

• Re: SPARQL and Unicode versions Dan Connolly
• Re: SPARQL and Unicode versions Dave Beckett
• Re: SPARQL and Unicode versions Dan Connolly

Saturday, 7 January 2006

• Re: [OK] Re: Protocol erratum Richard Newman
• [OK?] Re: Protocol erratum Kendall Clark
• SPARQL and Unicode versions Dave Beckett
• Protocol erratum Richard Newman

Friday, 6 January 2006

• Re: [OK?] Re: Query By Reference in SPARQL Protocol Leigh Dodds
• [closed] Re: inconsistent use of terminology in SPARQL query language document [OK?] Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: inconsistent use of terminology in SPARQL query language document [OK?] Seaborne, Andy
• langMatches wording in sparql query 2005-11-23 and tests Dave Beckett

Thursday, 5 January 2006

• [OK?] Re: Query By Reference in SPARQL Protocol Kendall Clark
• Re: Suspicious notation in SPARQL lexical rule for STRING_LITERAL_LONG1 [OK?] Seaborne, Andy
• Re: HTTP Status Codes for QueryRequestRefused Kendall Clark
• Re: [OK?] Re: [Fwd: SPARQL Protocol Review and Comments] David Wood

Wednesday, 4 January 2006

• Re: [Fwd: SPARQL Protocol Review and Comments] Kendall Clark
• Re: [Fwd: SPARQL Protocol Review and Comments] Dan Connolly
• [OK?] Re: [Fwd: SPARQL Protocol Review and Comments] Kendall Clark
• Re: [Fwd: SPARQL Protocol Review and Comments] David Wood
• Re: [Fwd: SPARQL Protocol Review and Comments] Kendall Clark
• Re: [Fwd: SPARQL Protocol Review and Comments] David Wood
• Re: [Fwd: SPARQL Protocol Review and Comments] Kendall Clark
• Re: disjunction, query language, data representation ... [closed] Dan Connolly
• Re: WSDL comments on SPARQL Protocol LC Draft [OK?] Dan Connolly
• Re: Comments on last-call SPARQL draft 20050721, sections 3 onwards [OK?] Seaborne, Andy

Tuesday, 3 January 2006

• [CLOSED] Re: Broad application of CSS hypertext pseudo-classes (as to SPARQL "link" elements) Jeen Broekstra
• [CLOSED] Re: Small comment on rdf-sparql-xmlres and CSS styling Jeen Broekstra

Monday, 2 January 2006

• [Closed] Re: [Ok?] Re: SPARQL Protocol comments (editorial) Arjohn Kampman

Last message date: Tuesday, 31 January 2006 16:55:53 UTC