Wednesday, 30 December 2009
Tuesday, 29 December 2009
Monday, 28 December 2009
Sunday, 27 December 2009
Saturday, 26 December 2009
Thursday, 24 December 2009
- Re: ACTION summary
- Re: ACTION summary
- Re: Update short forms (from ISSUE-24)
- Re: rq25 aggregate functions
- Re: Goodbye from me
- Re: Review of Service Description document
Wednesday, 23 December 2009
- Re: Review of Service Description document
- Re: "Proposed W3C Typographic Conventions"
- Re: rq25 aggregate functions
- Re: Update short forms (from ISSUE-24)
- Re: ACTION summary
- Re: Goodbye from me
- Update short forms (from ISSUE-24)
- ISSUE-20: SPARQL Update: Empty vs non-existent graphs
- Re: Update on Update
Tuesday, 22 December 2009
- Review of "SPARQL 1.1 Uniform HTTP Protocol for Managing RDF Graphs"
- minutes from today... http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-12-22
Monday, 21 December 2009
Tuesday, 22 December 2009
- Re: "Proposed W3C Typographic Conventions"
- "Proposed W3C Typographic Conventions"
- Goodbye from me
- Re: Comment on: rq25
- Re: ACTION summary
- Re: SPARQL WG - 2009-12-22 Agenda
- Re: ACTION summary
- Re: SPARQL WG - 2009-12-22 Agenda
- Re: SPARQL WG - 2009-12-22 Agenda
- Re: ACTION summary
- Review of "SPARQL 1.1 Update"
- Re: ACTION summary
- Re: ACTION summary
- ACTION summary
- Re: rq25 aggregate functions
- Re: rq25 aggregate functions
- Re: Comment on: entailment
- Review of Service Description document
- ACTION-145 --> ISSUE-25
- Re: SPARQL WG - 2009-12-22 Agenda
- Re: [TF-PP] Property Path FPWD
- Re: rq25 aggregate functions
- Re: rq25 aggregate functions
- Regrets 2009-12-22
Monday, 21 December 2009
- Re: rq25 aggregate functions
- Re: rq25 aggregate functions
- Re: Example updates
- Re: Example updates
- Re: rq25 aggregate functions
- Re: rq25 aggregate functions
- Re: Comment on: rq25
- Re: Comment on: rq25
- Re: Comment on: rq25
- Re: Comment on: rq25
- Comment on: entailment
- Re: Comment on: rq25
- Comment on: rq25
Sunday, 20 December 2009
Saturday, 19 December 2009
- Re: Re 2: [TF-ENT] OWL Direct Semantics added
- Re: Re 2: [TF-ENT] OWL Direct Semantics added
- Update on Update
Friday, 18 December 2009
- Re: Re 2: [TF-ENT] OWL Direct Semantics added
- SPARQL WG - 2009-12-22 Agenda
- [TF-ENT] Review of the Entailment regime document, 2009-12
Thursday, 17 December 2009
Wednesday, 16 December 2009
Tuesday, 15 December 2009
- Re: Team action request
- Re: Team action request
- Team action request
- Re: Draft response to LD-2
- Re: Draft response to LD-2
- Re: SPARQL WG - 2009-12-15 Agenda
- Re: SD vocab updates: dataset descriptions
- Re: Draft response to LD-2
- changes to service description document
- Re: Provide a high-level changelog summarising what has happened since FPWD in entailment
Monday, 14 December 2009
- Provide a high-level changelog summarising what has happened since FPWD in entailment
- Re: Response
- Re: Response
- Response
- SELECT expressions content
- Re: SPARQL WG - 2009-12-15 Agenda
- XML doc format
- Re: important issues on rdf-update to put on the TC before christmas?
Sunday, 13 December 2009
- Re: important issues on rdf-update to put on the TC before christmas?
- Re: important issues on rdf-update to put on the TC before christmas?
Saturday, 12 December 2009
Wednesday, 9 December 2009
Tuesday, 8 December 2009
- SPARQL WG minutes 2009-12-08
- Inner CONSTRUCT (Was Drafting definitions for select expressions)
- important issues on rdf-update to put on the TC before christmas?
- Re: Drafting definitions for select expressions
- Draft response to LD-2
- Re: Drafting definitions for select expressions
- Re: Drafting definitions for select expressions
- Re: Drafting definitions for select expressions
- Re: Drafting definitions for select expressions
- Possible regrets for today
- Re: Example updates
- Re: agenda for tomorrow...
Monday, 7 December 2009
- ACTION-140:Track all mails on comments list on wiki - done
- Re: agenda for tomorrow...
- Re: agenda for tomorrow... now here's the agenda.
- Re: agenda for tomorrow...
- agenda for tomorrow...
- SPARQL Query 1.0 Errata processing
- ACTION-133
Friday, 4 December 2009
Thursday, 3 December 2009
- Re: Example updates
- Re: Example updates
- Re: Re 2: [TF-ENT] OWL Direct Semantics added
- Re: Updates
- Re: Example updates
- Re: Example updates
- Re: Example updates
- Appologies
- Re: Re 2: [TF-ENT] OWL Direct Semantics added
- Re: Example updates
- Re: Example updates
- Re: Updates
- Re: Example updates
- Re: Updates
- Re: Possible Duplicate?
- Re: SD vocab updates: dataset descriptions
- Possible Duplicate?
- Re: Example updates
- Re: Example updates
Wednesday, 2 December 2009
- Re: Re 2: [TF-ENT] OWL Direct Semantics added
- Re: SD vocab updates: dataset descriptions
- Re: SD vocab updates: dataset descriptions
- Re: Draft response to Rob Vesse
- Re: Draft response to Rob Vesse
- Re: Draft response to Rob Vesse
- Re: Example updates
- Re: Draft response to Rob Vesse
Tuesday, 1 December 2009
- Example updates
- Re: Draft response to Rob Vesse
- Re: Updates
- Re: Updates
- Re: Updates
- Re: SPARQL TC 2009-12-01 Agenda
- Draft response to Rob Vesse
- Re: Updates
- Re: SPARQL TC 2009-12-01 Agenda
- Updates
Monday, 30 November 2009
Sunday, 29 November 2009
Wednesday, 25 November 2009
Tuesday, 24 November 2009
- Re: RDB2RDF Working Group
- Re: [TF-ENT] OWL Direct Semantics added
- Re: Re 2: [TF-ENT] OWL Direct Semantics added
- Re: [TF-ENT] OWL Direct Semantics added
- Re: Re 2: [TF-ENT] OWL Direct Semantics added
- Re: [TF-PP] Document now in CVS
- Re: [TF-ENT] OWL Direct Semantics added
- Re: [TF-PP] Document now in CVS
- Re: [TF-PP] Minor comments on the current document
- Re: [TF-PP] Minor comments on the current document
- Re 2: [TF-ENT] OWL Direct Semantics added
- Re: [TF-PP] Minor comments on the current document
- Re: [TF-ENT] OWL Direct Semantics added
- Regrets for todays teleconf
- [TF-PP] Minor comments on the current document
- Re: [TF-PP] Document now in CVS
- At risk for todays telecon.
- Re: [TF-PP] Document now in CVS
- Re: [TF-PP] Document now in CVS
- Re: SPARQL TC 2009/11/24 Agenda
- Re: [TF-PP] Document now in CVS
Monday, 23 November 2009
- Availability tomorrow
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- Re: [TF-PP] Document now in CVS
- Re: RDF datasets for SPARQL Update?
- [TF-ENT] OWL Direct Semantics added
- Re: RDF datasets for SPARQL Update?
- Re: last week's minute and next week's agenda
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- Re: RDF datasets for SPARQL Update?
- Re: RDB2RDF Working Group
- Re: RDF datasets for SPARQL Update?
- Re: RDF datasets for SPARQL Update?
- SPARQL TC 2009/11/24 Agenda
- RDF datasets for SPARQL Update?
- Re: last week's minute and next week's agenda
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- Fwd: RDB2RDF Working Group
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- Re: SD vocab updates: dataset descriptions
- Re: SD vocab updates: dataset descriptions
- Re: SD vocab updates: dataset descriptions
- Re: [TF-PP] Document now in CVS
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
Sunday, 22 November 2009
- Re: SD vocab updates: dataset descriptions
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
Saturday, 21 November 2009
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- Re: last week's minute and next week's agenda
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- last week's minute and next week's agenda
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- SD vocab updates: dataset descriptions
Thursday, 19 November 2009
Wednesday, 18 November 2009
- Re: "Unbound" in SPARQL
- Re: "Unbound" in SPARQL (was Re: [TF-LIB] COALESCE is an unhelpful choice of name)
Tuesday, 17 November 2009
- Re: "Unbound" in SPARQL
- RE: [TF-LIB] COALESCE is an unhelpful choice of name
- Re: CommentResponse:ldodds-query-1 ready for review
- Re: "Unbound" in SPARQL (was Re: [TF-LIB] COALESCE is an unhelpful choice of name)
- Re: "Unbound" in SPARQL (was Re: [TF-LIB] COALESCE is an unhelpful choice of name)
- Re: "Unbound" in SPARQL (was Re: [TF-LIB] COALESCE is an unhelpful choice of name)
- Re: "Unbound" in SPARQL (was Re: [TF-LIB] COALESCE is an unhelpful choice of name)
- Regrets 2009/17/11
- Re: "Unbound" in SPARQL (was Re: [TF-LIB] COALESCE is an unhelpful choice of name)
- Re: "Unbound" in SPARQL (was Re: [TF-LIB] COALESCE is an unhelpful choice of name)
- CommentResponse:ldodds-query-1 ready for review
- Re: "Unbound" in SPARQL (was Re: [TF-LIB] COALESCE is an unhelpful choice of name)
Monday, 16 November 2009
- Re: "Unbound" in SPARQL (was Re: [TF-LIB] COALESCE is an unhelpful choice of name)
- Re: "Unbound" in SPARQL (was Re: [TF-LIB] COALESCE is an unhelpful choice of name)
- SPARQL WG Agenda - Tues. Nov. 17, 2009
- Re: scope of alias variables
Sunday, 15 November 2009
- "Unbound" in SPARQL (was Re: [TF-LIB] COALESCE is an unhelpful choice of name)
- Re: [TF-LIB] COALESCE is an unhelpful choice of name
- Re: Semantics of SUM
- Re: [TF-LIB] COALESCE is an unhelpful choice of name
Saturday, 14 November 2009
- Re: Semantics of SUM
- Re: [TF-LIB] COALESCE is an unhelpful choice of name
- Re: [TF-LIB] COALESCE is an unhelpful choice of name
- Re: [TF-LIB] COALESCE is an unhelpful choice of name
- Re: [TF-LIB] COALESCE is an unhelpful choice of name
- Re: [TF-LIB] COALESCE is an unhelpful choice of name
- Re: [TF-LIB] COALESCE is an unhelpful choice of name
- Re: Semantics of SUM
- Re: scope of alias variables
- Re: [TF-LIB] COALESCE is an unhelpful choice of name
- Re: DISTINCT with aggregates
- Re: [TF-LIB] COALESCE is an unhelpful choice of name
- Re: [TF-LIB] COALESCE is an unhelpful choice of name
- Re: [TF-LIB] COALESCE is an unhelpful choice of name
- Re: [TF-LIB] COALESCE is an unhelpful choice of name
- Re: [TF-LIB] COALESCE is an unhelpful choice of name
Friday, 13 November 2009
- Re: [TF-LIB] COALESCE is an unhelpful choice of name
- XML Spec and local.css
- Re: [TF-LIB] COALESCE is an unhelpful choice of name
- Re: [TF-LIB] COALESCE is an unhelpful choice of name
- Re: [TF-LIB] COALESCE is an unhelpful choice of name
- Re: [TF-LIB] COALESCE is an unhelpful choice of name
- Re: [TF-LIB] COALESCE is an unhelpful choice of name
- Re: HAVING vs. FILTER
- Re: [TF-LIB] COALESCE is an unhelpful choice of name
- Re: [TF-LIB] COALESCE is an unhelpful choice of name
- Re: Semantics of SUM
- Re: [TF-LIB] COALESCE is an unhelpful choice of name
- Re: HAVING vs. FILTER
- [TF-ENT] Entailment Regimes telecon summary
- Re: Semantics of SUM
- Re: F2F3
- Re: F2F3
- Re: DISTINCT with aggregates
- Re: scope of alias variables
- Re: DISTINCT with aggregates
- Re: scope of alias variables
- Re: [TF-ENT] Entailment Regimes telecon today
- Re: [TF-ENT] Entailment Regimes telecon today
- [TF-LIB] COALESCE is an unhelpful choice of name
- [TF-ENT] Entailment Regimes telecon today
- Re: scope of alias variables
- Re: HAVING vs. FILTER
- Re: Semantics of SUM
- Re: DISTINCT with aggregates
- Re: scope of alias variables
- Re: requiring aliases for projected expressions (was: Re: Views on the outcomes of F2F)
- Re: HAVING vs. FILTER (was: Re: Views on the outcomes of F2F)
- scope of alias variables (was: Re: Views on the outcomes of F2F)
- subqueries in FILTERs / EXISTS in FILTERs (was: Re: Views on the outcomes of F2F)
- requiring aliases for projected expressions (was: Re: Views on the outcomes of F2F)
- mixed datatypes and aggregates (was: Re: Views on the outcomes of F2F)
- DISTINCT with aggregates (was: Re: Views on the outcomes of F2F)
- HAVING vs. FILTER (was: Re: Views on the outcomes of F2F)
- F2F3
Thursday, 12 November 2009
- Re: Semantics of SUM
- Re: Semantics of SUM
- RE: Views on the outcomes of F2F
- Re: Views on the outcomes of F2F
- Re: Semantics of SUM
- scribe list reset
- Minutes from 2009-11-10 telecon
Wednesday, 11 November 2009
- Re: Potential design space of LET/assignment
- Re: Potential design space of LET/assignment
- Re: Potential design space of LET/assignment
- Re: Potential design space of LET/assignment
- Re: Potential design space of LET/assignment
- Potential design space of LET/assignment (was: Re: Views on the outcomes of F2F)
- Re: Semantics of SUM
- Re: Views on the outcomes of F2F
Tuesday, 10 November 2009
- Re: Views on the outcomes of F2F
- Re: Views on the outcomes of F2F
- Re: Views on the outcomes of F2F
- Re: Views on the outcomes of F2F
- Re: Views on the outcomes of F2F
- Re: Semantics of SUM
- Re: HTTP Update : graph naming
- Re: Location for F2F number 3
- Re: HTTP Update : graph naming
- Semantics of SUM
- Re: Draft response for " Inferencing on graph patterns" comment of Simon Reinhardt
- Re: Views on the outcomes of F2F
- Re: Draft response for " Inferencing on graph patterns" comment of Simon Reinhardt
- Views on the outcomes of F2F
- Location for F2F number 3
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- Introducing myself
- Re: SPARQL Agenda - Tues. 10-November-2009
- Re: Draft response for " Inferencing on graph patterns" comment of Simon Reinhardt
- HTTP Update : graph naming
- Re: Draft response for " Inferencing on graph patterns" comment of Simon Reinhardt
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- Re: Draft response for " Inferencing on graph patterns" comment of Simon Reinhardt
- Draft response for " Inferencing on graph patterns" comment of Simon Reinhardt
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
Monday, 9 November 2009
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- Re: More on the evil examples... and "What really happened to Limit per Resource?"
- Re: More on the evil examples... and "What really happened to Limit per Resource?"
- Re: More on the evil examples... and "What really happened to Limit per Resource?"
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- SPARQL Agenda - Tues. 10-November-2009
Sunday, 8 November 2009
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- Re: More on the evil examples... and "What really happened to Limit per Resource?"
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
Saturday, 7 November 2009
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- Re: [TF-ENT] Entailment Regimes telecon
- Re: Fwd: Some comments on the SPARQL 1.1 draft documents
- Re: More on the evil examples... and "What really happened to Limit per Resource?"
Friday, 6 November 2009
- Re: [TF-ENT] Entailment Regimes telecon
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- Re: example query on aggregates in SPARQL/Query Section 2
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- More on the evil examples... and "What really happened to Limit per Resource?"
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- Re: Draft Response for "Comments on SPARQL 1.1 WD 20091022"
- [TF-PP] Document now in CVS
- Re: [TF-ENT] Entailment Regimes telecon
- Re: Draft Response for "Comments on SPARQL 1.1 WD 20091022"
- Re: example query on subselect in SPARQL/Query Section 3
- Re: Draft Response for "Comments on SPARQL 1.1 WD 20091022"
- Re: Some comments on the SPARQL 1.1 draft documents
- Re: Some comments on the SPARQL 1.1 draft documents
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- Draft Response for "Comments on SPARQL 1.1 WD 20091022"
- Fwd: Some comments on the SPARQL 1.1 draft documents
- Re: example query on aggregates in SPARQL/Query Section 2
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
Thursday, 5 November 2009
- Re: example query on aggregates in SPARQL/Query Section 2
- Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- example query on subselect in SPARQL/Query Section 3
- Re: example query on aggregates in SPARQL/Query Section 2
- Re: example query on aggregates in SPARQL/Query Section 2
- example query on aggregates in SPARQL/Query Section 2
Wednesday, 4 November 2009
- ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax
- Re: [TF-ENT] Entailment Regimes telecon
- Re: [TF-ENT] Entailment Regimes telecon
- Re: [TF-ENT] Entailment Regimes telecon
- Re: [TF-ENT] Entailment Regimes telecon
- Re: [TF-ENT] Entailment Regimes telecon
Tuesday, 3 November 2009
Monday, 2 November 2009
- Re: Rough minutes from last week's meeting (2009-10-27)
- Rough minutes from last week's meeting (2009-10-27)
- Re: Introduction: Andy Seaborne
- just before we start... agenda now reflecting last TC's agreements
- purely administrative: management of comments
- Re: [TF-ENT] URIs for entailment regimes in service descriptions
Sunday, 1 November 2009
- Re: [TF-ENT] URIs for entailment regimes in service descriptions
- Re: [TF-ENT] URIs for entailment regimes in service descriptions
- Re: [TF-ENT] URIs for entailment regimes in service descriptions
- Re: [TF-ENT] URIs for entailment regimes in service descriptions
- Re: [TF-ENT] URIs for entailment regimes in service descriptions
- Re: [TF-ENT] URIs for entailment regimes in service descriptions
- Re: [TF-ENT] URIs for entailment regimes in service descriptions
- Re: [TF-ENT] URIs for entailment regimes in service descriptions
- Re: [TF-ENT] URIs for entailment regimes in service descriptions
- Re: [TF-ENT] URIs for entailment regimes in service descriptions
- Re: [TF-ENT] URIs for entailment regimes in service descriptions
- Re: Alternative Syntaxes for BGPs
- Re: [TF-ENT] URIs for entailment regimes in service descriptions
Saturday, 31 October 2009
Friday, 30 October 2009
- Re: Alternative Syntaxes for BGPs
- Re: Alternative Syntaxes for BGPs
- Re: Alternative Syntaxes for BGPs
- Re: Alternative Syntaxes for BGPs
- Re: Alternative Syntaxes for BGPs
- Re: Alternative Syntaxes for BGPs
- RE: The syntax of the SELECT clause.
- RE: Alternative Syntaxes for BGPs
- Re: Alternative Syntaxes for BGPs
- Re: Alternative Syntaxes for BGPs
- RE: Alternative Syntaxes for BGPs
- Design of SELECT expressions
- Re: Alternative Syntaxes for BGPs
- Re: Alternative Syntaxes for BGPs
- RE: Alternative Syntaxes for BGPs
- Re: Alternative Syntaxes for BGPs
Thursday, 29 October 2009
- Re: Alternative Syntaxes for BGPs
- RE: Alternative Syntaxes for BGPs
- Re: Alternative Syntaxes for BGPs
- Alternative Syntaxes for BGPs
- Re: Confusing SPARQL/Update request
- Re: First (rough) F2F agenda
- Re: First (rough) F2F agenda
- Confusing SPARQL/Update request
- RE: First (rough) F2F agenda
- And one more [Was: Call for Exclusions: SPARQL 1.1 (Various)]
Wednesday, 28 October 2009
Tuesday, 27 October 2009
- Re: Agenda SPARQL TC 2009-10-27 - 10:00 Eastern = *14:00* UK time !!!
- [TF-ENT] URIs for entailment regimes in service descriptions
- Re: Agenda SPARQL TC 2009-10-27 - 10:00 Eastern = *14:00* UK time !!!
Monday, 26 October 2009
- Re: Agenda SPARQL TC 2009-10-27 - 10:00 Eastern = *14:00* UK time !!!
- Fwd: DAWG test case structure
- Re: Agenda SPARQL TC 2009-10-27 - 10:00 Eastern = *14:00* UK time !!!
- Agenda SPARQL TC 2009-10-27 - 10:00 Eastern = *14:00* UK time !!!
Saturday, 24 October 2009
Friday, 23 October 2009
- ISWC (was: First (rough) F2F agenda)
- First (rough) F2F agenda
- Re: error in the status boilerplate text...
- Re: Gathering issues for F2F
- Re: error in the status boilerplate text...
- error in the status boilerplate text...
Thursday, 22 October 2009
- Six SPARQL 1.1 Working Drafts Published
- Call for Exclusions: SPARQL 1.1 (Various)
- Re: Protocol extensions for federated querying
- RE: Protocol extensions for federated querying
- Re: ISSUE-47: Is MODIFY syntax required?
- RE: ISSUE-47: Is MODIFY syntax required?
- Re: Small note to editors
- Small note to editors
Wednesday, 21 October 2009
- Re: Fwd: Protocol extensions for federated querying
- Re: Protocol extensions for federated querying
- Re: Fwd: Protocol extensions for federated querying
- Fwd: Protocol extensions for federated querying
Tuesday, 20 October 2009
- Re: GROUP_CONCAT
- Re: GROUP_CONCAT
- Re: GROUP_CONCAT
- GROUP_CONCAT
- RE: Gathering issues for F2F
- Re: ISSUE-47: Is MODIFY syntax required?
- Re: ISSUE-47: Is MODIFY syntax required?
- RE: SPARQL WG Agenda - October 20, 2009
- Re: SPARQL WG Agenda - October 20, 2009
- ISSUE-49: Is a graph an information resource
- Re: Update review
- Re: ISSUE-47: Is MODIFY syntax required?
- SPARQL 1.1 grammar updated
- Re: Update review
- ISSUE-48: Is DELETE too verbose?
- SPARQL Update 1.1, SPARQL Query Language 1.1 --> SPARQL 1.1 Update, SPARQL 1.1 Query Language
- ISSUE-47: Is MODIFY syntax required?
- ISSUE-46: Can INSERTS, DELETES, and other 'subupdates' be nested inside update language queries?
- ISSUE-45: Can INSERTS, DELETES, and other 'subupdates' be nested inside SELECT queries?
- Re: Protocol changes
- Re: Protocol changes
- Re: Protocol changes
Monday, 19 October 2009
- Re: Protocol changes
- Re: Gathering issues for F2F
- Re: SPARQL WG Agenda - October 20, 2009
- Gathering issues for F2F
- SPARQL WG Agenda - October 20, 2009
- Re: Editing documents
- Re: Update review
- Re: Editing documents
- Re: Editing documents
- Re: Editing documents
- RE: Editing documents
Sunday, 18 October 2009
- Re: Re 2: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- Re: Re 2: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- Re: Questions about Update 1.1
- RE: Questions about Update 1.1
- Re: Questions about Update 1.1
- RE: Questions about Update 1.1
- RE: Questions about Update 1.1
- RE: HTTP update : default graph
- RE: Questions about Update 1.1
Saturday, 17 October 2009
- Re: Re 2: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- Re: Re 2: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- Re: Re 2: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- RE: Re 2: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- Re: Re 2: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- RE: Re 2: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- Re: Re 2: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- RE: Re 2: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
Friday, 16 October 2009
- Re: Update review
- Re: Questions about Update 1.1
- Re: HTTP update : default graph
- Re: Questions about Update 1.1
- Re: Questions about Update 1.1
- Re: Questions about Update 1.1
- Re: Update review
- Update grammar oddities
- Re: Questions about Update 1.1
Thursday, 15 October 2009
- Re: Reformatted SPARQL REC
- Protocol changes
- RE: Questions about Update 1.1
- Questions about Update 1.1
- RE: Reformatted SPARQL REC
- Re: Update review
- Re: Update review
Wednesday, 14 October 2009
- SPARQL/Update and RDF collections
- Reformatted SPARQL REC
- HTTP update : default graph
- Editing documents
- RE: SPARQL WG Agenda - Tuesday, October 13, 2009
- Re: SPARQL WG Agenda - Tuesday, October 13, 2009
- Re: [TF-ENT] Review of the entailment document
Tuesday, 13 October 2009
- RE: ACTION-115: Note on proxy graph URI
- Re: [TF-ENT] Review of the entailment document
- RE: SPARQL WG Agenda - Tuesday, October 13, 2009
- [TF-ENT] Review of the entailment document
- Re: updated service description document
- Re: updated service description document
- Re: updated service description document
- Re: updated service description document
- Re: Re 2: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- Re: SPARQL WG Agenda - Tuesday, October 13, 2009
- Re: ACTION-115: Note on proxy graph URI
- Re: ACTION-115: Note on proxy graph URI
- RE: Re 2: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- Re: ACTION-115: Note on proxy graph URI
Monday, 12 October 2009
- Re: Re 2: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- Re: SPARQL WG Agenda - Tuesday, October 13, 2009
- Re: Is a graph an information resource?
- Re: SPARQL WG Agenda - Tuesday, October 13, 2009
- RE: SPARQL WG Agenda - Tuesday, October 13, 2009
- SPARQL WG Agenda - Tuesday, October 13, 2009
- RE: HTTP Update and HTTP verbs
- Re: HTTP Update and HTTP verbs
- Re: ACTION-115: Note on proxy graph URI
- [TF-ENT] new conditions for RDF(S) solutions
- Regrets
- Re: ACTION-115: Note on proxy graph URI
- Re: HTTP Update and HTTP verbs
- re: Is a graph an information resource?
- RE: Re 2: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- Re: HTTP Update and HTTP verbs
- Re: Re 2: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- Re: Re 2: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- Re: Re 2: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- Re 2: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- Re: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- RE: [TF-ENT] redundant blank nodes
- Re: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- Re: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- RE: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- Re: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- RE: updated service description document
Sunday, 11 October 2009
- Re: ACTION-115: Note on proxy graph URI
- updated service description document
- RE: ACTION-115: Note on proxy graph URI
- Re: ACTION-115: Note on proxy graph URI
- Re: ACTION-115: Note on proxy graph URI
- Re: ACTION-115: Note on proxy graph URI
- ACTION-115: Note on proxy graph URI
Saturday, 10 October 2009
- Is a graph an information resource?
- Re: INSERT/DELETE Update syntax
- Re: [TF-PP] Questions on Property Paths
Friday, 9 October 2009
- Re: REST and HTTP Update
- Re: Comments on RDF Update Protocol for HTTP
- Re: REST and HTTP Update
- Re: [TF-ENT] redundant blank nodes
- RE: INSERT/DELETE Update syntax
- RE: [TF-PP] Questions on Property Paths
- RE: [TF-ENT] redundant blank nodes
- Re: [TF-PP] Questions on Property Paths
- Re: INSERT/DELETE Update syntax
- RE: [TF-PP] Questions on Property Paths
- RE: INSERT/DELETE Update syntax
- Re: Data in turtle syntax
- RE: Data in turtle syntax
- Data in turtle syntax
- Re: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- Re: INSERT/DELETE Update syntax
- Re: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- Re: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- Re: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
Thursday, 8 October 2009
- Re: INSERT/DELETE Update syntax
- RE: Versioning (again, sorry!)
- Re: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- Re: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- Re: REST and HTTP Update
- Re: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- Re: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- Re: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- Re: REST and HTTP Update
- Re: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- Re: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- Re: Versioning (again, sorry!)
- INSERT/DELETE Update syntax
- Re: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- [TF-PP] Questions on Property Paths
- Re: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- Re: [TF-ENT] redundant blank nodes
- Re: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- Re: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- Re: REST and HTTP Update
- Re: Versioning (again, sorry!)
- Re: Versioning (again, sorry!)
- Re: [TF-ENT] redundant blank nodes
- Re: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- Re: Versioning (again, sorry!)
- Re: Versioning (again, sorry!)
Wednesday, 7 October 2009
- Re: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- ISSUE-43: should entailment-regimes be declared over the whole dataset or individual graphs?
- RE: [TF-PP] Possible starting points
- Re: REST and HTTP Update
- Re: Versioning (again, sorry!)
- Re: REST and HTTP Update
- Re: REST and HTTP Update
- Re: Query 1.1 FPWD
- [TF-ENT] redundant blank nodes
- Re: [TF-ENT] A few comments on RDFS Entailment section
- Re: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- Query 1.1 FPWD
- RE: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- RE: REST and HTTP Update
- RE: [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- Versioning (again, sorry!)
- Update review
- [TF-ENT] Querying datasets with default plus named graphs
- Re: REST and HTTP Update
Tuesday, 6 October 2009
- Re: REST and HTTP Update
- Re: REST and HTTP Update
- Re: REST and HTTP Update
- Re: REST and HTTP Update
- minutes from today...
- Re: Comments on RDF Update Protocol for HTTP
- HTTP Update and HTTP verbs
- Re: Comments on RDF Update Protocol for HTTP
- REST and HTTP Update
- Re: [TF-ENT] A few comments on RDFS Entailment section
- Re: [TF-ENT] A few comments on RDFS Entailment section
- RE: [TF-ENT] A few comments on RDFS Entailment section
- Re: [TF-ENT] A few comments on RDFS Entailment section
- Re: Error handling (including with entailment regimes)
- Review of HTTP Update
- RE: [TF-ENT] A few comments on RDFS Entailment section
- regrets
Monday, 5 October 2009
- Re: [TF-ENT] A few comments on RDFS Entailment section
- Agenda Telecon 2009-10-06
- RE: ACTION-101 completed: Review of SPARQL 1.1
- RE: Review of SPARQL 1.1
- Re: [TF-ENT] A few comments on RDFS Entailment section
- [TF-ENT] A few comments on RDFS Entailment section
- Comments on Service Description
- RE: Definition of Basic Graph Pattern Matching & Pattern Instance Mapping
- Error handling (including with entailment regimes)
- Re: Review of SPARQL 1.1