- From: Gregory Williams <greg@evilfunhouse.com>
- Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2010 02:27:35 -0500
- To: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
As part of ACTION-338, I've tried to summarize our current use of and needs for vocabulary namespaces in SPARQL (as well as a brief summary of my feelings on the issue): http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/SPARQL_Namespaces We have a need for a namespace for all functions (and aggregates I'd assume) in SPARQL 1.0 and 1.1 as well as for the service description vocabulary. I believe the entailment regime and owl profile namespaces that have been created for us (used by the entailment and service description documents) are mostly orthogonal to this discussion as they don't really "belong" to SPARQL. .greg
Received on Thursday, 2 December 2010 07:28:07 UTC