- From: Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>
- Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2010 11:29:26 -0400
- To: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
- CC: Paul Gearon <gearon@ieee.org>, SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
I'd probably just wait until Paul and Alex have had a chance to evaluate the model in the paper and see if we'll be incorporating anything from it or not, before replying. lee On 4/2/2010 1:18 PM, Axel Polleres wrote: > Hi Paul, > > I reworded the proposed answer slightly to possibly reflect that we might consider his input when we get to the update semantics... > If you want to change that wording please feel free: > > http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/CommentResponse:RH-1 > > thanks! > Axel > > On 2 Apr 2010, at 17:42, Paul Gearon wrote: > >> Hi Axel, >> >> I get the impression that Ross is well aware of what we've been doing. >> I believe that he is offering his calculus as a contribution to the >> SPARQL Update effort since we have not had the opportunity to develop >> one for ourselves. >> >> Regards, >> Paul Gearon >> >> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 5:04 PM, Axel Polleres<axel.polleres@deri.org> wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> just read http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2010Mar/0009.html and added it to the comments... >>> not sure what to think of it. The mail doesn't really indicate any suggestions. >>> >>> I would be inclined to answer something short along the following lines. Agreed? >>> >>> ========================== >>> Dear Ross, >>> >>> Thanks for the input. You can check the current working draft of the SPARQL/Update specification >>> that the group is working on, which is an evolution of the SPARQL/Update proposal you cite in your paper [4], at: >>> >>> http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-update/ >>> >>> Comments on this document are highly welcome! >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Axel, on behalf of the WG >>> ========================== >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > > >
Received on Monday, 5 April 2010 15:30:05 UTC