- From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 13:26:07 -0600
- To: "Seaborne, Andy" <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
- Cc: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
>Please put text changes on this thread to reduce the risk of them >getting lost. > If its any consolation to anyone, I'm now the one who is feeling overwhelmed. I have to focus on non-WG stuff for the rest of today, but I'll do you a version with the simplified definitions before Tuesday, for comparison. Pat PS. I agree with the separate document idea for the non-SPARQL stuff. We could also discuss things like told-bnodes in there as SPARQL variations. But then the SPARQL definitions should not even mention the scoping set B: all we need is the scoping graph being a bnode variant of G which should be standardized apart from all the BGPs and which defines the scope of the answer set. -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 home 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax FL 32502 (850)291 0667 cell phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Friday, 20 January 2006 19:26:14 UTC