Re: Dave Beckett's Comment

my personal opinion on those:

just my two cents...

On 13 Dec 2010, at 11:55, Steve Harris wrote:

> My (incomplete, see below) draft response is at
> One thing he raises is:
> “"SPARQL 1.1 Uniform HTTP Protocol for Managing RDF Graphs"
> is rather a long title; what does 'Uniform' or 'HTTP' add?  SOAP is dead.
> suggest "SPARQL 1.1 RDF Graph Management Protocol"
> or RDF dataset”
> I'm inclined to agree, but do we want to discuss a rename of the document at this point, or are we happy with it as is?

I think this is covered by the open ACTION-290 and - at this point - suggest to answer along these lines.
"We have an open action on this in the working group 
and will consider this suggestion in this context." 

> another:
> “9 Property Paths
> I am unlikely to ever implement any of this, it's a second query
> language inside SPARQL.  How many systems implemented this before
> the SPARQL 1.1 work was started?”
> I don't know the answer to that offhand, did we find that when we were voting for what features to include?

I guess we should probably answer that several systems implemented property paths in one or the other form, 
concretely I think ARQ and Virtuoso had some support for property paths, right? In the process of the working group, it 
converged to the current proposal.

> - Steve
> -- 
> Steve Harris, CTO, Garlik Limited
> 1-3 Halford Road, Richmond, TW10 6AW, UK
> +44 20 8439 8203
> Registered in England and Wales 535 7233 VAT # 849 0517 11
> Registered office: Thames House, Portsmouth Road, Esher, Surrey, KT10 9AD

Received on Tuesday, 14 December 2010 16:14:55 UTC