- From: David Wood <david@3roundstones.com>
- Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2011 20:31:13 -0400
- To: Guus Schreiber <guus.schreiber@vu.nl>
- Cc: RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
On Jun 7, 2011, at 14:20, Guus Schreiber wrote: > See > http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.06.08 > > Two questions: > > 1. SPARQL LC: any progress we can report on the reviews on behalf of the WG? Our most substantive comments will relate to the string representation issues. We seem to be approaching a consensus to remove the differences between string representations from the abstract (but not surface) syntax, but aren't there yet. If we can get there in time, we have the possibility of suggesting some minor changes to SPARQL. If not, we will have to live with their decisions when it comes time for us to produce the Turtle documents. I'd surely prefer to have SPARQL and Turtle agree, but would also like to address the string issues. I have heard that the SPARQL WG is not particularly interested in addressing substantive comments. Although I understand that from a process standpoint, we shouldn't let process dictate progress if we have something real to say. I personally think alignment between Turtle and SPARQL trumps the SPARQL WG's timing, but we may need to convince them of that. Regards, Dave > > 2. Eric, Gavin: any progress on the Turtle WD? We decided at the F2F to make an effort to publish a first version before the summer. > > Guus > > -- > Prof. Guus Schreiber > Web & Media, Computer Science > VU University Amsterdam > http://www.cs.vu.nl/~guus >
Received on Wednesday, 8 June 2011 00:31:42 UTC