- From: <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
- Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 00:39:10 +0100
- To: connolly@w3.org
- Cc: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
> 1. Convene, take roll, review records and agenda > > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/ > 2005-02-01T14:30Z > > tel:+1.617.761.6200 code:7333 > supplementary IRC chat:irc://irc.w3.org:6665/dawg > log to appear:http://www.w3.org/2005/02/01-dawg-irc > > scribe: EricP > Regrets Alberto Reggiori, Kendall Clark > partial regrets AndyS > > records: > > PROPOSED to accept > RDF Data Access Working Group Meeting, 19-20 January 2005 > hosted near Helsinki, Finland by Profium > Dan Connolly, chair > with thanks to the scribes: JanneS, DaveB, AndyS, EricP, SteveH > $Revision: 1.56 $ of $Date: 2005/02/07 15:20:36 $ > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/ftf4.html > as a true record > > PROPOSED to accept > RDF Data Access WG Teleconference > 1 Feb 2005 In http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/ftf4.html#item18 I see that the topic "SPARQL punctuation syntax" is [[ RESOLVED: to adopt the syntax of 1.171 SPARQL draft over the objection of EricP and with KendallC abstaining. ]] In the comment http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/0387.html I read and fully support the idea that [[ The grammar for SPARQL frequently involves graph patterns. These should use the N3 grammar, specifically a subset at a level to the subset known as Turtle. ]] it is sharply motivated in rest of that message e.g. [[ (Similarly, the list construct for collections makes it possible to actually use lists in practice, where elaborations in terms of rdf:first and rdf:rest are impractically cumbersome.) ]] For me this is an ISSUE and I herewith would like to put it. -- Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Monday, 7 February 2005 23:39:49 UTC