- From: Kendall Clark <kendall@monkeyfist.com>
- Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 18:53:05 -0400
- To: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Cc: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On Sep 12, 2006, at 7:26 AM, Bijan Parsia wrote: > > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/rq24.html > > I would prefer that: > Should DISTINCT be based on lean graphs? > Be phrased as > What is the definition of DISTINCT? I agree with this suggestion to the editors. > Should SPARQL care about graphs that are inconsistent by D- > entailment? > > as: > What are the answers of a query of a D-inconsistent graph? And with this one too. > Finally, I would prefer a different phrasing for: > """Many of these issues reduce to "Is SPARQL a graph query > language or a higher level query language?" """" I *really* dislike this current phrasing; it's far too tendentious to be useful. What is a "higher level query language" anyway? > But without specifying which issues do so and how, I think it's > more confusing than helpful. Agreed. Cheers, Kendall
Received on Sunday, 17 September 2006 22:52:03 UTC