- From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 08:51:10 -0400
- To: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
- Cc: sparQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On Wed, 2011-03-23 at 11:56 +0000, Axel Polleres wrote:
> On 22 Mar 2011, at 16:21, Andy Seaborne wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On 22/03/11 15:15, Steve Harris wrote:
> > > I think it's a good idea, the current name is a bit misleading.
> >
> > +1
>
> +1, likewise
+1, which I sort of said before this thread started.
- s
>
> Axel
>
> > >
> > > - Steve
> > >
> > > On 2011-03-22, at 14:48, Lee Feigenbaum wrote:
> > >
> > >> Based on recent conversations, there has been suggestions that since the dataset protocol is defined against (mutable) graph stores, the name we chose in http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2011-01-25#resolution_3, that we change the name to reflect this.
> > >>
> > >> The current name is:
> > >>
> > >> SPARQL 1.1 RDF Dataset HTTP Protocol
> > >>
> > >> I'd imagine the alternative name would be:
> > >>
> > >> SPARQL 1.1 Graph Store HTTP Protocol
> > >>
> > >> Please use this thread to express support or concern about this proposed change. We'll make a final decision on the name next Tuesday, and I promise that we won't then revisit it again. :-)
> > >>
> > >> Lee
> > >>
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 23 March 2011 12:51:22 UTC