- From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
- Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2009 10:55:22 +0000
- To: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On 26 Mar 2009, at 09:56, Orri Erling wrote: > > Hi > > This would be a matter of perception. > > The fact is, as a regular web developer would see it, that if the WG > ,manages to agree on update, aggregates, expressions, grouping and > nesting, > then it becomes, for the first time, possible to write what one > would call a > regular database driven application without relying on vendor specific > extensions. > > On its own merits, this would warrant a major version number. But > if one > does give it a new major number, one offhand acknowledges that the > previous > spec was somehow insufficient. Hence it seems that the threshold for > issuing new major numbers is very high. Some members of the WG, including Garlik, are keen to put the UPDATE stuff into a different Rec, that's not called SPARQL. Given the timescale and charter I can't see us making any radical changes to SPARQL itself. - Steve -- Steve Harris Garlik Limited, 2 Sheen Road, Richmond, TW9 1AE, UK +44(0)20 8973 2465 http://www.garlik.com/ Registered in England and Wales 535 7233 VAT # 849 0517 11 Registered office: Thames House, Portsmouth Road, Esher, Surrey, KT10 9AD
Received on Thursday, 26 March 2009 10:56:00 UTC