Re: Review SPARQL Query?


I think it's better to wait until the doc is finished.  If, however, it 
fits better with your time, then there are just one or two specific 
points that need work (+ general editorial) so reviewing the rest could 


What we are missing most is tests.  In the test work so far, we have 
ended up sometimes identifying differing expectations of the design with 
the WG. As LC is suppose to be design-stable and changes expensive, I 
think it's important to have test coverage before LC to make sure the WG 
is in proper agreement on the details.


On 13/01/11 15:24, Steve Harris wrote:
> That's correct from ,my point of view.
> - Steve
> On 2011-01-13, at 11:07, Birte Glimm wrote:
>> Andy, Steve,
>> just to confirm that I did understand this correctly in the last
>> teleconf. I wait with the review until you tell me that the doc is
>> ready, right?
>> Cheers,
>> Birte
>> --
>> Dr. Birte Glimm, Room 309
>> Computing Laboratory
>> Parks Road
>> Oxford
>> OX1 3QD
>> United Kingdom
>> +44 (0)1865 283520

Received on Sunday, 16 January 2011 17:01:54 UTC