- From: Kjetil Kjernsmo <Kjetil.Kjernsmo@computas.com>
- Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 10:42:03 +0200
- To: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
On Thursday 04 June 2009 08:46:29 Lee Feigenbaum wrote: > > * ProjectExpression needs a better description and motivation. > > We feel that the mention of XSLT is not very relevant, as assigning a > > name automatically, like some engines do now, is sufficient for XSLT. > > It should also be motivated by showing why it is required by other > > features. > > I took a stab at this at > http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:ProjectExpressions As discussed on the teleconf yesterday, it needs better examples too. It doesn't sound like the examples are actually executeable as it is now, and they should be. Also, it is also a good thing if they do not rely on other features that we do not yet have, such as concat(). It is good to have both SELECT and CONSTRUCT examples. Can anyone have a stab at this? Kind regards Kjetil Kjernsmo -- Senior Knowledge Engineer / SPARQL F&R Editor Mobile: +47 986 48 234 Email: kjetil.kjernsmo@computas.com Web: http://www.computas.com/ | SHARE YOUR KNOWLEDGE | Computas AS PO Box 482, N-1327 Lysaker | Phone:+47 6783 1000 | Fax:+47 6783 1001
Received on Wednesday, 10 June 2009 08:42:44 UTC