- From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
- Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2010 17:28:19 +0000
- To: Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>
- Cc: Paul Gearon <gearon@ieee.org>, SPARQL Working Group WG <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On 16 Feb 2010, at 17:23, Lee Feigenbaum wrote: > On 2/16/2010 11:52 AM, Paul Gearon wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 10:24 AM, SPARQL Working Group Issue Tracker >> <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote: >>> >>> ISSUE-54: Do we need (descriptions of) property functions in SD? >>> Is this in scope for us? >>> >>> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/54 >> >> I believe that we want this. >> >> The scope of what property functions are capable of is essentially >> unrestricted, so I don't think it's possible to really describe what >> these functions do. However, it should be possible to obtain a list >> of >> properties that fall into this category. As a user I would find that >> useful in two ways: >> >> 1. I'd know that using this property in a query, or getting it back >> in >> a result involves entailed data, and not just extensional data. >> 2. If I happen to recognize a property from the list, I will know >> that >> a particular feature will be available to me. > > I'd be surprised if anyone disagrees that this is useful. > > However, I have no idea how we would specify it in the service > description document. How would we define a property/class that > describes something that is not itself defined anywhere? The only > way I see to do it is to define what a property function is, and > that's beyond our scope. Right, this is my feeling too. - Steve -- Steve Harris, Garlik Limited 2 Sheen Road, Richmond, TW9 1AE, UK +44 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 Tuesday, 16 February 2010 17:28:48 UTC