- From: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
- Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 07:24:15 +0800
- To: "Andy Seaborne" <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Cc: "SPARQL Working Group" <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On 10 Nov 2010, at 04:02, Andy Seaborne wrote: > > > On 09/11/10 17:42, Axel Polleres wrote: > >>> which we may want to reuse, or should we uniformly refer to the > >>> > >>> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql-functions# > >>> > >>> for all functions (also the xs: ones? > >> > >> Reuse where possible. > > > > Remembering that we had this discussion partly before, one argument against reuse and for uniformly using a single > > namespace was that this single namespace would indicate exactly the interchangeable functions within the SPARQL1.1 spec > > and that these functions then would be usable without a namespace prefix as simple keywords of the language. > > Must have missed that - I don't recall a proposal to make the names > keywords in the language for all mandatory functions from F&O - is the > proposal to add new keywords for all required functions, then map to > IRIs (sparqlfn:) and owl:sameAs to fn:. that'd work for me. Axel > > Andy > > PS > http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=0AkNZYESXv3IndGwyRkRXZ2hES0RjM0c3MHhLa05vTmc&gid=0 >
Received on Tuesday, 9 November 2010 23:24:56 UTC