- From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2007 08:59:32 +0000
- To: Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>
- Cc: Adrian Walker <adriandwalker@gmail.com>, 'RDF Data Access Working Group' <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
I would add that there are non-trivial technical issues surrounding the lack of the Unique Name Assumption (in RDF, but also of equality constructs) and in how to handle BNodes in answers. These problems grow more difficult as you move up the expressivity stack (e.g., even to RDFS, but certainly to OWL). The group *heroically* wrestled with some of these issues already and made a strong effort to be forward compatible. It's not clear that adding aggregation would be merely a matter of a few months. There are other significant areas in need of support (e.g., update). However, there are proposals coming down the pike and there's no reason that implementors cannot try to keep largely in synch. Cheers, Bijan.
Received on Tuesday, 4 December 2007 08:59:48 UTC