Re: Agenda for tomorrow's TC 2010-08-24

On Aug 23, 2010, at 7:59 PM, Axel Polleres wrote:

>> * SPARQL 1.1 Common Functions Library
>>   Status? Are we doing it? Document?
>> * should move to promote the JSON format as a REC
>>   and canonicalise its name?
> Good points as well, I would prefer to move them to next time, though.

I don't know what would be involved in including both of these at this point, but I think both of these are important. There are many implementations that share a common set of functions that would benefit from standardization (most of these are probably from XPath F&O and have been listed on the wiki[1]; Leigh Dodds' survey[2] is also relevant here). The JSON format is similarly implemented by several implementations and standardization would greatly benefit potential new users of SPARQL for whom JSON is a preferable format to XML.

Is the WG timeline the primary argument against including these in our current work?



Received on Tuesday, 24 August 2010 00:27:54 UTC