Re: bnodes as answer bindings

I couldn't even read the message up to the end.
It is so intrinsically arrogant and full of ignorance that does not  
deserve wasting time on it - and it is from an "invited" expert. I am  
astonished. Is it so hard to discuss about science? Apparently this  
is not among the interests of this group. I couldn't find anybody in  
the group to share the responsibility of the basic scientific choices  
we had to face.
In fact, this is happening exactly when the excellent Jorge Pérez  
(from the database community) found a *serious* bug - of which I am  
co-responsible - in the entailment semantics of BGPs, which nobody  
spotted so far and which invalidates the core of the current  
document. Shall I spend time to fix it? I probably will - since this  
is my job as a scientist - but I am not sure that this will happen in  
the context of this group. This is the proof that a W3C working group  
shouldn't attempt at doing things that are not consolidated, since no  
space is left to do serious research and serious discussions. Is Sir  
t. aware of that? Is W3C making good use of my money and of my work  
as a volunteer for it?
I guess that the DAWG needs a big 'good luck',
--e.