- From: Howard Katz <howardk@fatdog.com>
- Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 08:19:09 -0800
- To: <andy.seaborne@hp.com>, "Bijan Parsia" <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
- Cc: "Steve Harris" <S.W.Harris@ecs.soton.ac.uk>, <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
> -----Original Message----- > From: public-rdf-dawg-request@w3.org > [mailto:public-rdf-dawg-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Seaborne, Andy > Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2005 8:03 AM > To: Bijan Parsia > Cc: Steve Harris; public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > Subject: Re: XML serialization of SPARQL [ snip ... ] > And timing points: > > A/ An XML syntax would be useful in situations outlined here - > so would be RDF > one for RDF tools - but what happens about the test suite? Is > one syntax the > primary one for defining tests? > > B/ As the purpose is for XML tools, I'd like to see a input from those > communities during the creation of the XML syntax, during the > requirments. +1. I'd be happy to help request/collate feedback in that area. Whether it's me or somebody else: How do you define those communities? Who do you see using an XML syntax and primarily to what end? Howard
Received on Wednesday, 16 March 2005 16:26:02 UTC