- From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 14:34:14 +0200
- To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Cc: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>, RDF-WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
On Apr 20, 2011, at 13:35 , Andy Seaborne wrote: > > > On 20/04/11 10:56, Richard Cyganiak wrote: > >> The consequence of the decision are, as I see it: > ... >> b) It is a change that breaks compatibility between SPARQL 1.0 and >> SPARQL 1.1, in a *minor* and *easily characterized and motivated* >> way. > > I don't think it's minor. Evidence to show it is would be good. > > One way would be to add a WG note (highlighted box) to the Turtle spec as it is published as WD and in LC to make sure the change is noticed. > > > For people with deployed queries, a software upgrade will now either silently change the meaning of a query (only occurs for BGP trailing 18.) or creates a syntax error in otherwise working systems (the case of "18. ."). That's a big deal for them and their software suppliers. > > It's because of the success that these things become significant. > > Establishing a message somehow that further changes to existing systems would be good. The way I read these lines is as if you were opposed to make any change here. Is that correct? (Just want to understand.) Ivan > >> Overall that's a change for the better, I think. >> >> Best, Richard > > Andy > ---- Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ mobile: +31-641044153 PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
Received on Wednesday, 20 April 2011 12:33:29 UTC