- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 13:21:58 -0600
- To: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
- Cc: Kendall Clark <kendall@monkeyfist.com>, DAWG Mailing List <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>, Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>, Hugo Haas <hugo@w3.org>, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
On Mon, 2005-03-21 at 13:27 -0500, Bijan Parsia wrote: > On Mar 21, 2005, at 1:12 PM, Dan Connolly wrote: > [snip] > > LC candidate; i.e. proposal from the editor to the WG, not from the WG > > to the world. And all indications are that the QL editors are on > > track for 31 Mar LC candidate. > > Hmm. Perhaps. It's not so clear to me. > > >> Things that need to be completed for protocol (IMHO): > >> 1) XML syntax for query language with XML Schema description (kendall > >> and I are working on that; of course, bit of a moving target as the > >> query language keeps changing, or potentially changing) > > > > I don't see that as critical path. It's not in the charter, > > not among our requirements or even objectives, and not among the > > WG issues. > > I think it implicit in using WSDL. Our discussion was fairly explicit to the contrary: <xs:element name='queryString' type='xs:string'/> <!-- in, e.g., SPARQL syntax --> -- http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/ftf5-bos.html#item_03 > > I'm not inclined to add it to the issues list. If there's support for > > it as a requirement from more than one WG member, I suspect I'll > > discover that in due course (perhaps as a comment on this week's > > agenda) I haven't followed the thread closely, since, as I say, it's > > not on our critical path. > > Well, I've argued why it is important to the protocal document, at > length. I've been sick so I've not replied to the very end of the > thread, but I saw nothing directed substantially to my arguments. Silence doesn't imply agreement... especially for things that aren't on our agenda. > >> 2) Sensible XML Schemable XML output format (I thought this was the > >> same as the xsi:type discussion, but I'm happy to raise a separate > >> issue). > > > > That's on the editor's TODO list... > > "ACTION DaveB: to consider use of xsi:dataType ala comment from Steer" > > > > but there isn't a WG decision in the critical path. > > I would like to raise having a fully W3C Schemable XML syntax for > results, then. As I say, I'm not inclined to add it to the issues list unless/until there's more support. > >> Once these are done, the rest is fairly straightforward. > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Bijan. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Monday, 21 March 2005 19:22:01 UTC