Re: DAWG disjunction objection [closed]

On Mon, 2006-02-20 at 13:01 -0800, Dave Beckett wrote:
> When I was a DAWG working group member, I objected to disjunction:
> on the grounds of implementation cost.
> At this time over a year later, there are people who have implemented
> it, so I'd withdraw my personal objection to it (I am not speaking for
> my current or former employers).
> However, I've still not found the time in the last year to implement it
> myself in Rasqal, or can see that changing anytime soon.  Other parts of
> SPARQL are higher priority to me.

Noted in Revision 1.134  2006/03/20 23:09:12

> Dave
Dan Connolly, W3C
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E

Received on Monday, 20 March 2006 23:10:25 UTC