- From: Simon Raboczi <raboczi@tucanatech.com>
- Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 00:25:55 +1000
- To: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
On 25/08/2004, at 0:02, Kendall Clark wrote: > On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 11:29:36PM +1000, Simon Raboczi wrote: >> >> Incorporating Dan's suggestions brings us to the following state of >> play: >> >> [[ >> 4.5 Querying multiple sources >> >> It should be possible for a query to specify which of the available >> RDF >> graphs it is to be executed against. If more than one RDF graph is >> specified, the result is as it the query had been executed against the >> merge[1] of the specified RDF graphs. >> >> Some services only offer to query one graph; they are considered to >> trivially satisfy this objective. >> >> While a variety of use cases motivate this feature, it is not a >> requirement because it is not clear whether this feature can be >> implemented in a generally scalable fashion. >> ]] > > As I read this new language, the only difference between it and the > existing language in UC&R is the addition of the third, explanatory > paragraph? Is that right? No, the second paragraph is also an addition. I had it as a comment in my initial drafting, but it was Dan who suggested making it part of the actual text. > Also, I think I'm becoming convinced about the utility and elegance of > yr graph-centric approach It'd be much more convincing if I could get around to writing out the formal model -- mostly because people generally find extending syntax to be fun, but extending mathematical proof to be painful. It should hurt whenever our query model bloats. ;)
Received on Tuesday, 24 August 2004 14:26:30 UTC