- From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
- Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 01:18:37 -0400
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On Oct 17, 2005, at 2:51 PM, Dan Connolly wrote: > I just updated the entry for rdfSemantics in the issues list. I'ts as > neutral as I can manage. Please try to prepare for straw polls on > these 3 options tomorrow: Good summary! I haven't reviewed the test cases for impact, but shall do so, er...right now! SteveH's thing is called 3Store. Looking at: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/tests/README.html I'm surprised that even non construct queries are specified as rdf graphs...I would have thought that they'd be specified in terms of the canonical results format. Granted this makes things a little tougher for the "optional redundancy" position, but not that much harder. But maybe I'm missing something. Cheers, Bijan.
Received on Tuesday, 18 October 2005 05:18:44 UTC