- From: Polleres, Axel <axel.polleres@siemens.com>
- Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 17:13:53 +0200
- To: "Peter.Waher@clayster.com" <Peter.Waher@clayster.com>, "cbuilaranda@gmail.com" <cbuilaranda@gmail.com>, "public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org" <public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org>
Dear Peter, I have added an item linking to your mail to consider implementation experience of specifying datasets for federated query to our http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Future_Work_Items list (where the group collects suggestions for future work). I'd appreciate if you could briefly confirm that this answers your concern. Best regards, Axel > -----Original Message----- > From: Peter Waher [mailto:Peter.Waher@clayster.com] > Sent: Mittwoch, 03. Oktober 2012 16:15 > To: Carlos Buil Aranda; public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org > Subject: RE: Default and named datasets in federated queries > > Hello Carlos > > Thank you for your reply. > > Will the issue be kept and raised automatically when work on > the next version commences? Or do I need to raise this issue > again for the next version? > > Otherwise, my question has been answered. > > Sincerely, > Peter Waher > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Carlos Buil Aranda [mailto:cbuilaranda@gmail.com] > Sent: den 3 oktober 2012 09:43 > To: public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org; Peter Waher > Subject: RE: Default and named datasets in federated queries > > Dear Peter, > The Working Group has considered your comments about allowing > FROM and FROM NAMED clauses after the SERVICE clause but > we've opted for the current design for simplicity and due to > a lack of implementation experience. > Along these lines, the group will investigate more about how > datasets will/can interact with the new federated query form > as the community gets more implementation experience. Based > on this, a future SPARQL-WG will be able to consider your > comments in more depth. Unfortuantely, the Working Group has > very tight deadlines and there is not much time left to > design and implement substantive changes to the specification now. > We would be grateful if you would acknowledge that your > comment has been answered by sending a reply to this mailing list. > Carlos, on behalf of the SPARQL WG > >
Received on Wednesday, 3 October 2012 15:14:24 UTC