Re: Graph naming in Service Descriptions (ACTION-266; discussion of comment DS-1)

On Jul 13, 2010, at 2:41 AM, Steve Harris wrote:

> I don't think that we should try and gracefully handle situations where people assert nonsense in other graphs, that's just opening can of worms. 


It seems Damian has now retracted[1] his entailment issue, so I think the consensus here is that it's a non-issue. Sandro's issues -- the naming of sd:name and the modeling of the named graphs in the service description -- are still open, though.



Received on Wednesday, 14 July 2010 17:16:15 UTC