- From: Gregory Williams <greg@evilfunhouse.com>
- Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 10:44:23 -0500
- To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Cc: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On Mar 1, 2011, at 10:33 AM, Andy Seaborne wrote: >> What I'm suggesting is that this case doesn't seem inconsistent with the suggested wording to me: >> >> "• The RDF content returned from dereferencing a service URL<U> MUST include one triple matching: ?service sd:url<U> ." > > "MUST include one" might imply "and only one" > > What about? > "MUST include at least one" I *knew* you were going to suggest that! :) I was hesitant to do that because I would like the normal case to be one. But yes, that is what technically what I'm proposing. Would that text be acceptable to you? thanks, .greg
Received on Tuesday, 1 March 2011 15:44:52 UTC