RE: Updated on the Features and Rationale document



> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-rdf-dawg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-rdf-dawg-
> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Alexandre Passant
> Sent: 29 September 2009 08:16
> To: Gregory Williams
> Cc: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org Group
> Subject: Re: Updated on the Features and Rationale document
> 
> Hi,
> 
> On 28 Sep 2009, at 23:44, Gregory Williams wrote:
> 
> > On Sep 28, 2009, at 5:52 PM, Alexandre Passant wrote:
> >
> >> Input would be appreciated on:
> >>
> >> - "Basic Federated Query": any idea of implementations besides DARQ ?
> >
> > I don't believe DARQ would qualify as "basic federated query" (it
> > goes beyond the "basic" part, imo). Wasn't this feature suggested as
> > a formalization of Andy's SERVICE keyword in ARQ?
> 
> You're right, it seems to be from the wiki page that this is what was
> agreed.
> Can one of the champion of that feature confirm ?

From my POV, getting anything more than basic connectivity for this round of standardization looks too ambitious.  The minimum is the ability of one processor to be able to call another.

http://jena.sourceforge.net/ARQ/service.html

Added to F&R.

This would be an optional feature.

 Andy

When the HTML was copied to the wiki, all the section numbers were copied as well.  And then mediawiki adds section numbers ...

> 
> > If so, I also support it in RDF::Query (as listed on the original
> > feature page on the wiki).
> 
> In that case, I'll indeed use the list of tools listed on the original
> feature page.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Alex.
> 
> >
> > .greg
> >
> 
> --
> Dr. Alexandre Passant
> Digital Enterprise Research Institute
> National University of Ireland, Galway
> :me owl:sameAs <http://apassant.net/alex> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

Received on Tuesday, 29 September 2009 08:08:00 UTC