public-rdf-wg@w3.org from March 2011 by author

Alex Hall

• Re: What *is* RDF? (Thursday, 31 March)
• Re: ISSUE-18: How do we parse "18." in Turtle? (Thursday, 31 March)
• Re: [Turtle] EBNF error? (decimal and integer) (Thursday, 31 March)
• Re: [JSON] I say again, what *is* JSON? (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: [JSON] I say again, what *is* JSON? (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: [Graphs] Fwd: Comments on "SPARQL 1.1 Uniform HTTP Protocol for Managing RDF Graphs" (Monday, 21 March)
• Re: [Turtle] the Turtle Grammar in the revised editor's draft does not allow comments in Turtledoc (Tuesday, 8 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-8 (IRI vs URI): Incorporate IRI-s into the RDF documents [Cleanup tasks] (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: Turtle, Qurtle, Super-Turtle, N-Triple, N-Quads, Trig - BC and Scope (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Existing data , existing code. (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: [GRAPHS] One graph to bind them all ? (Wednesday, 2 March)

Andy Seaborne

• [TTL] Standardizing N-Triples (Thursday, 31 March)
• Re: [Turtle] EBNF error? (decimal and integer) (Thursday, 31 March)
• [TTL] Long literals (Thursday, 31 March)
• Re: ISSUE-18: How do we parse "18." in Turtle? (Wednesday, 30 March)
• Re: ISSUE-18: How do we parse "18." in Turtle? (Wednesday, 30 March)
• Re: ISSUE-18: How do we parse "18." in Turtle? (Wednesday, 30 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-17 (graph merge): How are RDF datasets to be merged? [RDF Graphs] (Monday, 28 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-16 (Base JSON Grammar): What is the normative serialization of the JSON grammar? [RDF JSON] (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: [JSON] RDF collections and JSON arrays (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: [JSON] RDF collections and JSON arrays (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: [JSON] Tiny Proposal (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: [JSON] Tiny Proposal (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: [JSON] Classifying the use cases (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: [JSON] Classifying the use cases (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: [JSON] beating MongoDB (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] Some general serialization "things" (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] Examples for RDF JSON serializations side-by-side comparison (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] Examples for RDF JSON serializations side-by-side comparison (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] Summary of direction discussion (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] new yellow box, proposed solution (Tuesday, 22 March)
• Re: [JSON] market segments (Tuesday, 22 March)
• Re: [Graphs] g-text equivalence (Monday, 21 March)
• Re: [JSON] Meeting TOMORROW Monday, March 21st (Sunday, 20 March)
• Re: [Graphs] Fwd: Comments on "SPARQL 1.1 Uniform HTTP Protocol for Managing RDF Graphs" (Friday, 18 March)
• Re: [JSON] PROPOSAL: Syntax structure should be object-based (Friday, 18 March)
• Re: [JSON] PROPOSAL: Syntax structure should be object-based (Thursday, 17 March)
• Re: [JSON] PROPOSAL: Syntax structure should be object-based (Thursday, 17 March)
• Re: [JSON] PROPOSAL: Syntax structure should be object-based (Wednesday, 16 March)
• Re: [JSON] PROPOSAL: Syntax structure should be object-based (Wednesday, 16 March)
• Re: [JSON] PROPOSAL: Syntax structure should be object-based (Wednesday, 16 March)
• Re: [JSON] Reviewing RDF in JSON specs (Saturday, 12 March)
• Re: [JSON] The case for a triple-based approach (Thursday, 10 March)
• Re: [JSON] The case for a triple-based approach (Thursday, 10 March)
• Re: [JSON] The case for a triple-based approach (Thursday, 10 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-13 (RDF XMLLiterals): Review RDF XML Literals [Cleanup tasks][Turtle][JSON] (Thursday, 10 March)
• Re: [JSON] object-based JSON vs. triple-based JSON (Thursday, 10 March)
• Re: [JSON] object-based JSON vs. triple-based JSON (Thursday, 10 March)
• Re: [JSON] Survey for design requirements (Wednesday, 9 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Some syntax related issues (Wednesday, 9 March)
• Re: [JSON] Survey for design requirements (Wednesday, 9 March)
• Re: [Graphs] Proposal: RDF Datasets (Wednesday, 9 March)
• Re: [Graphs] BNode scope in RDF Datasets proposal (Wednesday, 9 March)
• Re: [Graphs] Proposal: RDF Datasets (Tuesday, 8 March)
• Re: [Turtle] the Turtle Grammar in the revised editor's draft does not allow comments in Turtledoc (Tuesday, 8 March)
• Re: [Graphs] Proposal: RDF Datasets (Tuesday, 8 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-12 (String Literals): Reconcile various forms of string literals (time permitting) [Cleanup tasks] (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: Was: Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: Was: Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-12 (String Literals): Reconcile various forms of string literals (time permitting) [Cleanup tasks] (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-12 (String Literals): Reconcile various forms of string literals (time permitting) [Cleanup tasks] (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-5 (Graph Literals): Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? [RDF Graphs] (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: [JSON] Survey for design requirements (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-12 (String Literals): Reconcile various forms of string literals (time permitting) [Cleanup tasks] (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: [JSON] Survey for design requirements (Sunday, 6 March)
• RDF datasets and graph literals (Sunday, 6 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-12 (String Literals): Reconcile various forms of string literals (time permitting) [Cleanup tasks] (Sunday, 6 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-5 (Graph Literals): Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? [RDF Graphs] (Sunday, 6 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-12 (String Literals): deprecate language tags? (Sunday, 6 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-12 (String Literals): deprecate language tags? (Sunday, 6 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-12 (String Literals): Reconcile various forms of string literals (time permitting) [Cleanup tasks] (Sunday, 6 March)
• Re: A modest proposal concerning blank nodes. (Thursday, 3 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Two formats (Thursday, 3 March)
• Re: A modest proposal concerning blank nodes. (Thursday, 3 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Misc initial thoughts (Thursday, 3 March)
• Re: [GRAPHS] Follow your graph nose. (Thursday, 3 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Existing data , existing code. (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: [GRAPHS] One graph to bind them all ? (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: [TURTLE] Extending Turtle before Rec (Tuesday, 1 March)
• Re: bang ! in turtle (Tuesday, 1 March)
• Re: bang ! in turtle (Tuesday, 1 March)
• Re: bang ! in turtle (Tuesday, 1 March)
• Re: Graphs and Being and Time (Tuesday, 1 March)

Antoine Zimmermann

• Re: ISSUE-18: How do we parse "18." in Turtle? (Wednesday, 30 March)
• Re: initial draft of today's minutes (Thursday, 24 March)
• I cannot connect to the IRC (Wednesday, 16 March)
• Re: [ALL] Raised Issues (Monday, 14 March)
• Re: [ALL] Raised Issues (Friday, 11 March)
• Re: Comments on bNode issue within RDB2RDF mapping language (Wednesday, 9 March)
• Re: [Graphs] Proposal: RDF Datasets (Tuesday, 8 March)
• [Turtle] the Turtle Grammar in the revised editor's draft does not allow comments in Turtledoc (Tuesday, 8 March)
• Re: [Graphs] Proposal: RDF Datasets (Tuesday, 8 March)
• Re: Is it possible to enable LaTeX support on the wiki? (Tuesday, 8 March)
• Is it possible to enable LaTeX support on the wiki? (Tuesday, 8 March)
• Re: [Graphs] Proposal: RDF Datasets (Tuesday, 8 March)
• Re: [Graphs] Proposal: RDF Datasets (Tuesday, 8 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-12 (String Literals): Reconcile various forms of string literals (time permitting) [Cleanup tasks] (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-12 (String Literals): Reconcile various forms of string literals (time permitting) [Cleanup tasks] (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: [GRAPHS] FYI: VoID vocabulary just published (Thursday, 3 March)
• Re: Turtle, Qurtle, Super-Turtle, N-Triple, N-Quads, Trig - BC and Scope (Thursday, 3 March)
• Re: Turtle, Qurtle, Super-Turtle, N-Triple, N-Quads, Trig - BC and Scope (Thursday, 3 March)
• Re: [GRAPHS] Follow your graph nose. (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: [GRAPHS] Follow your graph nose. (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: bang ! in turtle (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: bang ! in turtle (Tuesday, 1 March)
• Re: bang ! in turtle (Tuesday, 1 March)
• Re: bang ! in turtle (Tuesday, 1 March)
• Re: [ALL] Agenda telecon 2 Mar 11am EST (Tuesday, 1 March)

Axel Polleres

• Re: RDF-ISSUE-17 (graph merge): How are RDF datasets to be merged? [RDF Graphs] (Tuesday, 29 March)

Bauer, Herbert S. (Scott)

• Minutes March 3rd Meeting (Wednesday, 2 March)

Dan Brickley

• Re: What *is* RDF? (Thursday, 31 March)
• [JSON] URI vs IRI (Wednesday, 30 March)
• Re: [ALL] Agenda 30 Mar telecon, 1100 EST (Tuesday, 29 March)
• [JSON] fwd JSON Web Token (JWT) and JSON Web Signature (JWS) (Sunday, 27 March)
• draft use case for named graphs from FOAF work (Wednesday, 16 March)
• Re: [JSON] The case for a triple-based approach (Thursday, 10 March)
• Re: [JSON] The case for a triple-based approach (Thursday, 10 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Re: bang ! in turtle (Tuesday, 1 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Re: bang ! in turtle (Tuesday, 1 March)

David Wood

• [JSON] Consider Exhibit JSON? (Monday, 28 March)
• Re: What *is* RDF? (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: minutes 2011-03-23 (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: [JSON] beating MongoDB (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] Some general serialization "things" (Wednesday, 23 March)
• [ALL] Agenda 23 March [FOR EUROPEANS ONE HOUR EARLIER] (Monday, 21 March)
• Re: [JSON] one data point: Anzo on the Web (Friday, 18 March)
• Re: [JSON] one data point: Anzo on the Web (Friday, 18 March)
• Re: Make FTF1 Hotel Reservations Soon (Friday, 18 March)
• Make FTF1 Hotel Reservations Soon (Friday, 18 March)
• Re: [JSON] PROPOSAL: Syntax structure should be object-based (Wednesday, 16 March)
• Re: [JSON] PROPOSAL: Syntax structure should be object-based (Wednesday, 16 March)
• Re: [ALL] Raised Issues (Thursday, 10 March)
• [ALL] Raised Issues (Thursday, 10 March)
• Re: Other issues? (Wednesday, 9 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-8 (IRI vs URI): Incorporate IRI-s into the RDF documents [Cleanup tasks] (Wednesday, 9 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-8 (IRI vs URI): Incorporate IRI-s into the RDF documents [Cleanup tasks] (Wednesday, 9 March)
• Re: regrets for the next two telecons (Friday, 4 March)
• Re: The Sound of Qurtle (Friday, 4 March)
• Re: A modest proposal concerning blank nodes. (Thursday, 3 March)
• Re: Turtle, Qurtle, Super-Turtle, N-Triple, N-Quads, Trig - BC and Scope (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: Turtle, Qurtle, Super-Turtle, N-Triple, N-Quads, Trig - BC and Scope (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-4 (Deprecate N-Triples): Do we depecate N-Triples and use Turtle instead? (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-4 (Deprecate N-Triples): Do we depecate N-Triples and use Turtle instead? (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Re: bang ! in turtle (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: [GRAPHS] Follow your graph nose. (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: [GRAPHS] Follow your graph nose. (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: Graphs and Being and Time (Tuesday, 1 March)
• Re: Graphs and Being and Time (Tuesday, 1 March)
• Re: [ALL] Agenda telecon 2 Mar 11am EST (Tuesday, 1 March)
• Re: [ALL] Agenda telecon 2 Mar 11am EST (Tuesday, 1 March)

Eric Prud'hommeaux

• Re: [JSON] URI vs IRI (Wednesday, 30 March)
• Re: [JSON] I say again, what *is* JSON? (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: [JSON] Elephant in the room (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] new yellow box, proposed solution (Tuesday, 22 March)
• Re: [Turtle] starting with http://www.w3.org/2010/01/Turtle/ (Thursday, 17 March)

Fabien Gandon

• regrets (at www 2011) (Sunday, 27 March)
• Regrets for next week. (Friday, 4 March)
• Re: [GRAPHS] Follow your graph nose. (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: [GRAPHS] Follow your graph nose. (Wednesday, 2 March)
• [GRAPHS] Follow your graph nose. (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: [GRAPHS] One graph to bind them all ? (Wednesday, 2 March)
• [GRAPHS] One graph to bind them all ? (Tuesday, 1 March)

fensel

• Re: [ALL] Agenda 30 Mar telecon, 1100 EST (Wednesday, 30 March)
• Apologize (Wednesday, 9 March)

Gavin Carothers

• [Turtle] EBNF error? (decimal and integer) (Wednesday, 30 March)
• Re: [JSON] I say again, what *is* JSON? (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: [JSON] I say again, what *is* JSON? (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: +blank node identifiers was- Re: [Graphs] Fwd: Comments on "SPARQL 1.1 Uniform HTTP Protocol for Managing RDF Graphs" (Friday, 18 March)
• Re: [Graphs] Fwd: Comments on "SPARQL 1.1 Uniform HTTP Protocol for Managing RDF Graphs" (Friday, 18 March)
• [GRAPH] Diagram added to GraphConcepts wiki page (Monday, 14 March)
• Re: A modest proposal concerning blank nodes. (Thursday, 3 March)

Guus Schreiber

• Re: [Turtle] starting with http://www.w3.org/2010/01/Turtle/ (Wednesday, 30 March)
• [ALL] FTF presentations (Wednesday, 30 March)
• [ALL] Agenda 30 Mar telecon, 1100 EST (Tuesday, 29 March)
• [ALL] reminder: pls indicate your availability for ftf 13-14 April (Wednesday, 16 March)
• [ALL] Agenda 16 March [FOR EUROPEANS ONE HOUR EARLIER] (Tuesday, 15 March)
• [ALL] Agenda 9 March telecon 1100 EST (Tuesday, 8 March)

Ivan Herman

• Re: ISSUE-19: Should TURTLE allow triples like "[ :p 123 ]." as SPARQL does ? (Thursday, 31 March)
• Re: ISSUE-19: Should TURTLE allow triples like "[ :p 123 ]." as SPARQL does ? (Thursday, 31 March)
• Re: [JSON] Consider Exhibit JSON? (Tuesday, 29 March)
• Re: [JSON] RDF collections and JSON arrays (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: [JSON] RDF collections and JSON arrays (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: [JSON] RDF collections and JSON arrays (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: [JSON] RDF collections and JSON arrays (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: [JSON] Classifying the use cases (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: [JSON] I say again, what *is* JSON? (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: [JSON] RDF collections and JSON arrays (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: [JSON] Classifying the use cases (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: [JSON] Examples for RDF JSON serializations side-by-side comparison (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] Summary of direction discussion (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] The best of both worlds? (Monday, 21 March)
• Re: Make FTF1 Hotel Reservations Soon (Friday, 18 March)
• Re: [JSON] market segments (Thursday, 17 March)
• Re: [JSON] Clarification on JSON-LD (Wednesday, 16 March)
• Re: Is it possible to enable LaTeX support on the wiki? (Tuesday, 15 March)
• Re: [JSON] JSON Syntax Options - Datatypes / Typed Literals (Saturday, 12 March)
• Re: F2F Hotel recommendations? (Saturday, 12 March)
• Re: [JSON] JSON Syntax Options - URI Properties (Saturday, 12 March)
• Re: [JSON] the simple pivotal choice (Friday, 11 March)
• Re: [JSON] the simple pivotal choice (Friday, 11 March)
• Re: [JSON] Clarification on JSON-LD (Friday, 11 March)
• Re: [ALL] Raised Issues (Friday, 11 March)
• Re: Which WG? (Thursday, 10 March)
• [JSON] Clarification on JSON-LD (Thursday, 10 March)
• Re: Other issues? (Thursday, 10 March)
• Re: Comments on bNode issue within RDB2RDF mapping language (Thursday, 10 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-8 (IRI vs URI): Incorporate IRI-s into the RDF documents [Cleanup tasks] (Wednesday, 9 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-13 (RDF XMLLiterals): Review RDF XML Literals [Cleanup tasks][Turtle][JSON] (Thursday, 10 March)
• Re: Other issues? (Wednesday, 9 March)
• Re: [Graphs] BNode scope in RDF Datasets proposal (Wednesday, 9 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-13 (RDF XMLLiterals): Review RDF XML Literals [Cleanup tasks][Turtle][JSON] (Wednesday, 9 March)
• Re: [Graphs] Proposal: RDF Datasets (Tuesday, 8 March)
• Re: [Graphs] Proposal: RDF Datasets (Tuesday, 8 March)
• Re: [Graphs] Proposal: RDF Datasets (Tuesday, 8 March)
• Re: Is it possible to enable LaTeX support on the wiki? (Tuesday, 8 March)
• Re: [Graphs] Proposal: RDF Datasets (Tuesday, 8 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-13 (RDF XMLLiterals): Review RDF XML Literals [Cleanup tasks] (Tuesday, 8 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-13 (RDF XMLLiterals): Review RDF XML Literals [Cleanup tasks] (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: [JSON] Survey for design requirements (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: [MISC] Deprecation (was Re: RDF-ISSUE-5 (Graph Literals): Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? [RDF Graphs]) (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: [JSON] Survey for design requirements (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: Was: Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: [JSON] Survey for design requirements (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-12 (String Literals): Reconcile various forms of string literals (time permitting) [Cleanup tasks] (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-12 (String Literals): Reconcile various forms of string literals (time permitting) [Cleanup tasks] (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-12 (String Literals): Reconcile various forms of string literals (time permitting) [Cleanup tasks] (Monday, 7 March)
• Was: Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-12 (String Literals): Reconcile various forms of string literals (time permitting) [Cleanup tasks] (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-5 (Graph Literals): Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? [RDF Graphs] (Sunday, 6 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-5 (Graph Literals): Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? [RDF Graphs] (Sunday, 6 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Collecting the proposals (Sunday, 6 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-12 (String Literals): deprecate language tags? (Sunday, 6 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-5 (Graph Literals): Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? [RDF Graphs] (Saturday, 5 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-12 (String Literals): Reconcile various forms of string literals (time permitting) [Cleanup tasks] (Saturday, 5 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-11 (Reconciliation of documents): Reconciliation of various, semantics-oriented documents with the core RDF ones [Cleanup tasks] (Saturday, 5 March)
• Re: The Sound of Qurtle (Friday, 4 March)
• Re: Semantics of Qurtle (N3 vs TriG), Graph Literals again. (Friday, 4 March)
• [GRAPHS] FYI: VoID vocabulary just published (Thursday, 3 March)
• Miscellaneous tasks for the RDF WG (Action-18) (Thursday, 3 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Re: bang ! in turtle (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Re: bang ! in turtle (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: bang ! in turtle (Tuesday, 1 March)
• Re: bang ! in turtle (Tuesday, 1 March)
• Re: bang ! in turtle (Tuesday, 1 March)
• [Turtle] Re: bang ! in turtle (Tuesday, 1 March)
• Re: [GRAPHS] g-box - abstraction or concrete? (Tuesday, 1 March)

Jeremy Carroll

• minutes 2011-03-23 (Thursday, 24 March)
• initial draft of today's minutes (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-13 (RDF XMLLiterals): Review RDF XML Literals [Cleanup tasks][Turtle][JSON] (Thursday, 10 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-13 (RDF XMLLiterals): Review RDF XML Literals [Cleanup tasks][Turtle][JSON] (Wednesday, 9 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-13 (RDF XMLLiterals): Review RDF XML Literals [Cleanup tasks] (Wednesday, 9 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-13 (RDF XMLLiterals): Review RDF XML Literals [Cleanup tasks] (Wednesday, 9 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-13 (RDF XMLLiterals): Review RDF XML Literals [Cleanup tasks] (Monday, 7 March)

Lee Feigenbaum

• Re: [ALL] Agenda 30 Mar telecon, 1100 EST (Tuesday, 29 March)
• Re: [JSON] Elephant in the room (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] one data point: Anzo on the Web (Friday, 18 March)
• [JSON] one data point: Anzo on the Web (Friday, 18 March)
• Re: [JSON] PROPOSAL: Syntax structure should be object-based (Wednesday, 16 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Two formats (Saturday, 5 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Two formats (Friday, 4 March)
• Re: The Sound of Qurtle (Friday, 4 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Two formats (Thursday, 3 March)
• Re: [GRAPHS] Follow your graph nose. (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Re: bang ! in turtle (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: [GRAPHS] One graph to bind them all ? (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: [GRAPHS] One graph to bind them all ? (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: [GRAPHS] One graph to bind them all ? (Wednesday, 2 March)

Manu Sporny

• Re: [ALL] Agenda 30 Mar telecon, 1100 EST (Wednesday, 30 March)
• Re: [JSON] Constraining JSON serialization discussion (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: What *is* RDF? (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: [JSON] RDF collections and JSON arrays (Friday, 25 March)
• [JSON] Constraining JSON serialization discussion (Friday, 25 March)
• What *is* RDF? (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: [JSON] Elephant in the room (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] User segments update (Wednesday, 23 March)
• [JSON] User segments update (Wednesday, 23 March)
• [JSON] Summary of direction discussion (Wednesday, 23 March)
• [JSON] Minutes for today's discussion (Monday, 21 March)
• [JSON] The best of both worlds? (Monday, 21 March)
• Re: [JSON] Meeting TOMORROW Monday, March 21st (Monday, 21 March)
• [JSON] Meeting TOMORROW Monday, March 21st (Sunday, 20 March)
• Doodle poll: RDF in JSON work (Friday, 18 March)
• Re: [JSON] PROPOSAL: Syntax structure should be object-based (Thursday, 17 March)
• Re: [JSON] PROPOSAL: Syntax structure should be object-based (Thursday, 17 March)
• Re: [JSON] PROPOSAL: Syntax structure should be object-based (Thursday, 17 March)
• Re: [JSON] PROPOSAL: Syntax structure should be object-based (Thursday, 17 March)
• Re: [JSON] PROPOSAL: Syntax structure should be object-based (Wednesday, 16 March)
• Re: [JSON] PROPOSAL: Syntax structure should be object-based (Wednesday, 16 March)
• Re: [JSON] PROPOSAL: Syntax structure should be object-based (Wednesday, 16 March)
• Re: [JSON] PROPOSAL: Syntax structure should be object-based (Wednesday, 16 March)
• Re: [JSON] PROPOSAL: Syntax structure should be object-based (Wednesday, 16 March)
• [JSON] PROPOSAL: Syntax structure should be object-based (Wednesday, 16 March)
• Re: [JSON] the simple pivotal choice (Wednesday, 16 March)
• Re: [JSON] Clarification on JSON-LD (Tuesday, 15 March)
• Re: [JSON] Clarification on JSON-LD (Thursday, 10 March)
• Re: [JSON] object-based JSON vs. triple-based JSON (Thursday, 10 March)
• Re: [JSON] object-based JSON vs. triple-based JSON (Thursday, 10 March)
• Re: [JSON] object-based JSON vs. triple-based JSON (Thursday, 10 March)
• Re: [JSON] object-based JSON vs. triple-based JSON (Wednesday, 9 March)
• [JSON] Reviewing RDF in JSON specs (Wednesday, 9 March)
• Re: [JSON] Survey for design requirements (Wednesday, 9 March)
• Re: [JSON] Survey for design requirements (Wednesday, 9 March)
• [JSON] object-based JSON vs. triple-based JSON (Wednesday, 9 March)
• [JSON] implementation guidance (Wednesday, 9 March)
• Re: [JSON] Survey for design requirements (Wednesday, 9 March)
• Re: [JSON] Survey for design requirements (Monday, 7 March)
• [JSON] Survey for design requirements (Sunday, 6 March)

Matteo Brunati

• Re: [ALL] FTF presentations (Wednesday, 30 March)
• Re: [JSON] Consider Exhibit JSON? (Wednesday, 30 March)
• Minutes March 16th Meeting (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [ALL] Agenda 23 March [FOR EUROPEANS ONE HOUR EARLIER] (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [ALL] Agenda 16 March [FOR EUROPEANS ONE HOUR EARLIER] (Wednesday, 16 March)
• Re: [JSON] Survey for design requirements (Tuesday, 8 March)
• Re: [JSON] Initial comments (Wednesday, 2 March)

Michael Hausenblas

• Re: [JSON] Semantics of JSON (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: Comments on bNode issue within RDB2RDF mapping language (Wednesday, 9 March)
• Re: Comments on bNode issue within RDB2RDF mapping language (Wednesday, 9 March)
• Comments on bNode issue within RDB2RDF mapping language (Wednesday, 9 March)
• Re: [JSON] Survey for design requirements (Monday, 7 March)

Mischa Tuffield

• Apologies (Wednesday, 30 March)
• Apologies (Wednesday, 16 March)
• Re: I cannot connect to the IRC (Wednesday, 16 March)
• Re: Other issues? (Wednesday, 9 March)
• Other issues? (Wednesday, 9 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-8 (IRI vs URI): Incorporate IRI-s into the RDF documents [Cleanup tasks] (Wednesday, 9 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-8 (IRI vs URI): Incorporate IRI-s into the RDF documents [Cleanup tasks] (Wednesday, 9 March)
• [Turtle] Some syntax related issues (Wednesday, 9 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-8 (IRI vs URI): Incorporate IRI-s into the RDF documents [Cleanup tasks] (Monday, 7 March)

Nathan

• Re: ISSUE-19: Should TURTLE allow triples like "[ :p 123 ]." as SPARQL does ? (Thursday, 31 March)
• Re: ISSUE-18: How do we parse "18." in Turtle? (Wednesday, 30 March)
• Re: ISSUE-18: How do we parse "18." in Turtle? (Wednesday, 30 March)
• Re: ISSUE-18: How do we parse "18." in Turtle? (Wednesday, 30 March)
• Re: ISSUE-18: How do we parse "18." in Turtle? (Wednesday, 30 March)
• [JSON] Objects and RDF (Monday, 28 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-17 (graph merge): How are RDF datasets to be merged? [RDF Graphs] (Monday, 28 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-17 (graph merge): How are RDF datasets to be merged? [RDF Graphs] (Monday, 28 March)
• [JSON] Related (Monday, 28 March)
• Re: a subject-oriented nested dictionary with simple keys for RDF (Saturday, 26 March)
• Re: [JSON] RDF collections and JSON arrays (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: [JSON] RDF collections and JSON arrays (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: [JSON] I say again, what *is* JSON? (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: [JSON] I say again, what *is* JSON? (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: [JSON] I say again, what *is* JSON? (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: [JSON] I say again, what *is* JSON? (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: [JSON] Tiny Proposal (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: [JSON] Tiny Proposal (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: [JSON] beating MongoDB (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] Classifying the use cases (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] What *is* JSON? (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] Tiny Proposal (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] Tiny Proposal (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] What *is* JSON? (Wednesday, 23 March)
• [JSON] Tiny Proposal (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] Elephant in the room (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] Elephant in the room (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] Elephant in the room (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] Elephant in the room (Wednesday, 23 March)
• [JSON] Elephant in the room (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] Some general serialization "things" (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] Some general serialization "things" (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] Some general serialization "things" (Wednesday, 23 March)
• [JSON] Some general serialization "things" (Wednesday, 23 March)
• [JSON] data.nytimes (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] Summary of direction discussion (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] The best of both worlds? (Monday, 21 March)
• Re: [JSON] The best of both worlds? (Monday, 21 March)
• Re: [Graphs] g-text equivalence (Sunday, 20 March)
• Re: +blank node identifiers was- Re: [Graphs] Fwd: Comments on "SPARQL 1.1 Uniform HTTP Protocol for Managing RDF Graphs" (Friday, 18 March)
• +blank node identifiers was- Re: [Graphs] Fwd: Comments on "SPARQL 1.1 Uniform HTTP Protocol for Managing RDF Graphs" (Friday, 18 March)
• Re: [Graphs] Fwd: Comments on "SPARQL 1.1 Uniform HTTP Protocol for Managing RDF Graphs" (Friday, 18 March)
• Re: [Graphs] Fwd: Comments on "SPARQL 1.1 Uniform HTTP Protocol for Managing RDF Graphs" (Friday, 18 March)
• [Fwd: Re: Comments on "SPARQL 1.1 Uniform HTTP Protocol for Managing RDF Graphs"] (Friday, 18 March)
• Re: [Graphs] Fwd: Comments on "SPARQL 1.1 Uniform HTTP Protocol for Managing RDF Graphs" (Friday, 18 March)
• Re: [JSON] market segments - 6B solutions (Thursday, 17 March)
• Re: [JSON] PROPOSAL: Syntax structure should be object-based (Thursday, 17 March)
• Re: [JSON] market segments (Thursday, 17 March)
• Re: [JSON] PROPOSAL: Syntax structure should be object-based (Wednesday, 16 March)
• Re: [JSON] PROPOSAL: Syntax structure should be object-based (Wednesday, 16 March)
• Re: [JSON] PROPOSAL: Syntax structure should be object-based (Wednesday, 16 March)
• Re: [JSON] PROPOSAL: Syntax structure should be object-based (Wednesday, 16 March)
• Regrets (Wednesday, 16 March)
• JSON Syntax Options - Syntax Structure (Saturday, 12 March)
• [JSON] JSON Syntax Options - Languages (Saturday, 12 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Proposals page updated (Saturday, 12 March)
• [JSON] JSON Syntax Options - Datatypes / Typed Literals (Saturday, 12 March)
• Re: [JSON] JSON Syntax Options - URI Properties (Saturday, 12 March)
• Re: [JSON] JSON Syntax Options - URI Properties (Saturday, 12 March)
• [JSON] JSON Syntax Options - URI Properties (Friday, 11 March)
• Re: [JSON] the simple pivotal choice (Friday, 11 March)
• Re: [JSON] the simple pivotal choice (Friday, 11 March)
• Re: [JSON] the simple pivotal choice (Friday, 11 March)
• [JSON] Reference, activity streams (Thursday, 10 March)
• Which WG? (Thursday, 10 March)
• Re: [ALL] Raised Issues (Thursday, 10 March)
• Re: [JSON] object-based JSON vs. triple-based JSON (Thursday, 10 March)
• Re: Criteria for a good JSON RDF serialisation (Thursday, 10 March)
• Re: [JSON] the simple pivotal choice (Thursday, 10 March)
• Re: [JSON] object-based JSON vs. triple-based JSON (Wednesday, 9 March)
• [JSON] the simple pivotal choice (Wednesday, 9 March)
• Re: [Graphs] Proposal: RDF Datasets (Tuesday, 8 March)
• Re: [Graphs] Proposal: RDF Datasets (Tuesday, 8 March)
• Re: Generic "Graph" Use Cases (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: Generic "Graph" Use Cases (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: Generic "Graph" Use Cases (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: [MISC] Deprecation (was Re: RDF-ISSUE-5 (Graph Literals): Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? [RDF Graphs]) (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: [JSON] Survey for design requirements (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: Generic "Graph" Use Cases (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: [JSON] Survey for design requirements (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-5 (Graph Literals): Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? [RDF Graphs] (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: [JSON] Survey for design requirements (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: Generic "Graph" Use Cases (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: Generic "Graph" Use Cases (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: [JSON] Survey for design requirements (Sunday, 6 March)
• Generic "Graph" Use Cases (Sunday, 6 March)
• Re: RDF datasets and graph literals (Sunday, 6 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-5 (Graph Literals): Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? [RDF Graphs] (Sunday, 6 March)
• Re: should we standardize things not yet widely deployed? (Sunday, 6 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-5 (Graph Literals): Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? [RDF Graphs] (Saturday, 5 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-5 (Graph Literals): Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? [RDF Graphs] (Saturday, 5 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-5 (Graph Literals): Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? [RDF Graphs] (Saturday, 5 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-5 (Graph Literals): Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? [RDF Graphs] (Saturday, 5 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-5 (Graph Literals): Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? [RDF Graphs] (Saturday, 5 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-5 (Graph Literals): Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? [RDF Graphs] (Friday, 4 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Two formats (Friday, 4 March)
• Re: The Sound of Qurtle (Friday, 4 March)
• Re: The Sound of Qurtle (Friday, 4 March)
• Re: [GRAPHS] FYI: VoID vocabulary just published (Thursday, 3 March)
• Re: Turtle, Qurtle, Super-Turtle, N-Triple, N-Quads, Trig - BC and Scope (Thursday, 3 March)
• Re: a quick remark about blank nodes (Thursday, 3 March)
• Re: A modest proposal concerning blank nodes. (Thursday, 3 March)
• Re: A modest proposal concerning blank nodes. (Thursday, 3 March)
• Re: A modest proposal concerning blank nodes. (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: A modest proposal concerning blank nodes. (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: Turtle, Qurtle, Super-Turtle, N-Triple, N-Quads, Trig - BC and Scope (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Misc initial thoughts (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Existing data , existing code. (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Turtle, Qurtle, Super-Turtle, N-Triple, N-Quads, Trig - BC and Scope (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Misc initial thoughts (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Re: bang ! in turtle (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Re: bang ! in turtle (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: [GRAPHS] Follow your graph nose. (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: Graphs and Being and Time (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: Graphs and Being and Time (Tuesday, 1 March)
• Re: Graphs and Being and Time (Tuesday, 1 March)
• Re: Graphs and Being and Time (Tuesday, 1 March)
• Re: bang ! in turtle (Tuesday, 1 March)
• Re: bang ! in turtle (Tuesday, 1 March)
• Re: bang ! in turtle (Tuesday, 1 March)
• Re: bang ! in turtle (Tuesday, 1 March)
• Re: [TURTLE] Extending Turtle before Rec (Tuesday, 1 March)
• Re: bang ! in turtle (Tuesday, 1 March)
• bang ! in turtle (Tuesday, 1 March)
• Re: Graphs and Being and Time (Tuesday, 1 March)

Pat Hayes

• Re: What *is* RDF? (Thursday, 31 March)
• Re: ISSUE-19: Should TURTLE allow triples like "[ :p 123 ]." as SPARQL does ? (Thursday, 31 March)
• Re: ISSUE-18: How do we parse "18." in Turtle? (Wednesday, 30 March)
• Re: ISSUE-18: How do we parse "18." in Turtle? (Wednesday, 30 March)
• Re: [JSON] RDF collections and JSON arrays (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: [JSON] RDF collections and JSON arrays (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: [JSON] RDF collections and JSON arrays (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: [JSON] RDF collections and JSON arrays (Friday, 25 March)
• [JSON] RDF collections and JSON arrays (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: [JSON] I say again, what *is* JSON? (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: [JSON] I say again, what *is* JSON? (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: [Graphs] g-text equivalence (Monday, 21 March)
• Re: [Graphs] g-text equivalence (Sunday, 20 March)
• Re: [Graphs] Fwd: Comments on "SPARQL 1.1 Uniform HTTP Protocol for Managing RDF Graphs" (Sunday, 20 March)
• Re: [Graphs] Fwd: Comments on "SPARQL 1.1 Uniform HTTP Protocol for Managing RDF Graphs" (Sunday, 20 March)
• Re: [Graphs] Fwd: Comments on "SPARQL 1.1 Uniform HTTP Protocol for Managing RDF Graphs" (Sunday, 20 March)
• Re: +blank node identifiers was- Re: [Graphs] Fwd: Comments on "SPARQL 1.1 Uniform HTTP Protocol for Managing RDF Graphs" (Saturday, 19 March)
• Re: +blank node identifiers was- Re: [Graphs] Fwd: Comments on "SPARQL 1.1 Uniform HTTP Protocol for Managing RDF Graphs" (Saturday, 19 March)
• [Graphs] Fwd: Comments on "SPARQL 1.1 Uniform HTTP Protocol for Managing RDF Graphs" (Friday, 18 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-12 (String Literals): Reconcile various forms of string literals (time permitting) [Cleanup tasks] (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-11 (Reconciliation of documents): Reconciliation of various, semantics-oriented documents with the core RDF ones [Cleanup tasks] (Sunday, 6 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-12 (String Literals): Reconcile various forms of string literals (time permitting) [Cleanup tasks] (Sunday, 6 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-12 (String Literals): deprecate language tags? (Sunday, 6 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-5 (Graph Literals): Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? [RDF Graphs] (Saturday, 5 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-8 (IRI vs URI): Incorporate IRI-s into the RDF documents [Cleanup tasks] (Saturday, 5 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-12 (String Literals): Reconcile various forms of string literals (time permitting) [Cleanup tasks] (Saturday, 5 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-11 (Reconciliation of documents): Reconciliation of various, semantics-oriented documents with the core RDF ones [Cleanup tasks] (Saturday, 5 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-5 (Graph Literals): Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? [RDF Graphs] (Saturday, 5 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-5 (Graph Literals): Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? [RDF Graphs] (Saturday, 5 March)
• regrets for the next two telecons (Friday, 4 March)
• Re: A modest proposal concerning blank nodes. (Thursday, 3 March)
• a quick remark about blank nodes (Thursday, 3 March)
• Re: A modest proposal concerning blank nodes. (Thursday, 3 March)
• Re: A modest proposal concerning blank nodes. (Thursday, 3 March)
• Re: A modest proposal concerning blank nodes. (Thursday, 3 March)
• A modest proposal concerning blank nodes. (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: Turtle, Qurtle, Super-Turtle, N-Triple, N-Quads, Trig - BC and Scope (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: Graphs and Being and Time (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: Graphs and Being and Time (Tuesday, 1 March)
• Re: Graphs and Being and Time (Tuesday, 1 March)
• Re: Graphs and Being and Time (Tuesday, 1 March)

Peter Frederick Patel-Schneider

• Re: ISSUE-19: Should TURTLE allow triples like "[ :p 123 ]." as SPARQL does ? (Thursday, 31 March)
• Re: What *is* RDF? (Thursday, 31 March)
• Re: What *is* RDF? (Thursday, 31 March)
• Re: ISSUE-19: Should TURTLE allow triples like "[ :p 123 ]." as SPARQL does ? (Thursday, 31 March)
• Re: [Turtle] EBNF error? (decimal and integer) (Thursday, 31 March)
• Re: ISSUE-18: How do we parse "18." in Turtle? (Wednesday, 30 March)
• Re: ISSUE-18: How do we parse "18." in Turtle? (Wednesday, 30 March)
• Re: ISSUE-18: How do we parse "18." in Turtle? (Wednesday, 30 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-20 (Numeric local part): The prefixed name "ns:123" is legal in SPARQL - should it be legal for Turtle? [RDF Turtle] (Wednesday, 30 March)
• Re: ISSUE-18: How do we parse "18." in Turtle? (Wednesday, 30 March)
• Re: [ALL] Agenda 30 Mar telecon, 1100 EST (Tuesday, 29 March)
• Re: [JSON] Constraining JSON serialization discussion (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: [JSON] Constraining JSON serialization discussion (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: What *is* RDF? (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: [JSON] Semantics of JSON (Friday, 25 March)
• a subject-oriented nested dictionary with simple keys for RDF (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: [JSON] comments? (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: What *is* RDF? (Friday, 25 March)
• [JSON] comments? (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: [JSON] Semantics of JSON (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: [JSON] RDF collections and JSON arrays (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: [JSON] Constraining JSON serialization discussion (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: What *is* RDF? (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: [JSON] I say again, what *is* JSON? (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: [JSON] I say again, what *is* JSON? (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: [JSON] I say again, what *is* JSON? (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: [JSON] I say again, what *is* JSON? (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: [JSON] I say again, what *is* JSON? (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: [JSON] I say again, what *is* JSON? (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: [JSON] I say again, what *is* JSON? (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: [JSON] I say again, what *is* JSON? (Thursday, 24 March)
• [JSON] I say again, what *is* JSON? (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: [JSON] What *is* JSON? (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: [JSON] Tiny Proposal (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: [JSON] Classifying the use cases (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: [JSON] What *is* JSON? (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] What *is* JSON? (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] What *is* JSON? (Wednesday, 23 March)
• [JSON] What *is* JSON? (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] Tiny Proposal (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] Elephant in the room (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] Elephant in the room (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] Elephant in the room (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [Turtle] starting with http://www.w3.org/2010/01/Turtle/ (Thursday, 17 March)
• Re: [Turtle] starting with http://www.w3.org/2010/01/Turtle/ (Thursday, 17 March)
• Re: [Turtle] starting with http://www.w3.org/2010/01/Turtle/ (Thursday, 17 March)
• Re: [Turtle] starting with http://www.w3.org/2010/01/Turtle/ (Wednesday, 16 March)
• [MISC] Deprecation (was Re: RDF-ISSUE-5 (Graph Literals): Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? [RDF Graphs]) (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-5 (Graph Literals): Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? [RDF Graphs] (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: Semantics of Qurtle (N3 vs TriG), Graph Literals again. (Friday, 4 March)
• Re: The Sound of Qurtle (Friday, 4 March)
• The Sound of Qurtle (Friday, 4 March)
• Re: [TURTLE] Extending Turtle before Rec (Tuesday, 1 March)

Pierre-Antoine Champin

• Re: Make FTF1 Hotel Reservations Soon (Friday, 18 March)
• Re: [ALL] Agenda telecon 2 Mar 11am EST (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: bang ! in turtle (Wednesday, 2 March)

RDF Working Group Issue Tracker

• RDF-ISSUE-20 (Numeric local part): The prefixed name "ns:123" is legal in SPARQL - should it be legal for Turtle? [RDF Turtle] (Wednesday, 30 March)
• ISSUE-19: Should TURTLE allow triples like "[ :p 123 ]." as SPARQL does ? (Wednesday, 30 March)
• ISSUE-18: How do we parse "18." in Turtle? (Wednesday, 30 March)
• RDF-ISSUE-17 (graph merge): How are RDF datasets to be merged? [RDF Graphs] (Monday, 28 March)
• RDF-ISSUE-16 (Base JSON Grammar): What is the normative serialization of the JSON grammar? [RDF JSON] (Friday, 25 March)
• ISSUE-15: What is the relationship between the IRI and the triples in a dataset/quad-syntax/etc (Wednesday, 16 March)
• ISSUE-14: What is a named graph and what should we call it? (Wednesday, 16 March)
• RDF-ISSUE-13 (RDF XMLLiterals): Review RDF XML Literals [Cleanup tasks] (Monday, 7 March)
• RDF-ISSUE-12 (String Literals): Reconcile various forms of string literals (time permitting) [Cleanup tasks] (Saturday, 5 March)
• RDF-ISSUE-11 (Reconciliation of documents): Reconciliation of various, semantics-oriented documents with the core RDF ones [Cleanup tasks] (Saturday, 5 March)
• RDF-ISSUE-10 (Deprecation): Look if there are RDF(S) notions that are to be deprecated [Cleanup tasks] (Saturday, 5 March)
• RDF-ISSUE-9 (Complete Semantics): Inference rules are incomplete in the RDF Semantics [Cleanup tasks] (Saturday, 5 March)
• RDF-ISSUE-8 (IRI vs URI): Incorporate IRI-s into the RDF documents [Cleanup tasks] (Saturday, 5 March)
• RDF-ISSUE-7 (Leftover issues): Leftover issues from the RDF Core WG [Cleanup tasks] (Saturday, 5 March)
• RDF-ISSUE-6 (RDF Errata): Handling RDF Errata [Cleanup tasks] (Saturday, 5 March)
• RDF-ISSUE-5 (Graph Literals): Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? [RDF Graphs] (Friday, 4 March)
• RDF-ISSUE-4 (Deprecate N-Triples): Do we depecate N-Triples and use Turtle instead? (Wednesday, 2 March)

Richard Cyganiak

• Re: What *is* RDF? (Thursday, 31 March)
• Re: ISSUE-19: Should TURTLE allow triples like "[ :p 123 ]." as SPARQL does ? (Thursday, 31 March)
• Re: [JSON] Constraining JSON serialization discussion (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: [JSON] Semantics of JSON (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: [JSON] Classifying the use cases (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: (emphasising round-trip) Re: [JSON] Classifying the use cases (Friday, 25 March)
• [JSON] Semantics of JSON (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: [JSON] I say again, what *is* JSON? (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: [JSON] Classifying the use cases (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: [JSON] I say again, what *is* JSON? (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: [JSON] I say again, what *is* JSON? (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: [JSON] Classifying the use cases (Wednesday, 23 March)
• [JSON] Classifying the use cases (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] Elephant in the room (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] What *is* JSON? (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] User segments update (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] PROPOSAL: Syntax structure should be object-based (Wednesday, 16 March)
• Re: draft use case for named graphs from FOAF work (Wednesday, 16 March)
• Re: [JSON] PROPOSAL: Syntax structure should be object-based (Wednesday, 16 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Proposals page updated (Saturday, 12 March)
• [Turtle] Proposals page updated (Saturday, 12 March)
• Re: [JSON] Survey for design requirements (Thursday, 10 March)
• Re: [ALL] Raised Issues (Thursday, 10 March)
• Re: [ALL] Raised Issues (Thursday, 10 March)
• Re: Which WG? (Thursday, 10 March)
• Re: [JSON] The case for a triple-based approach (Thursday, 10 March)
• [JSON] The case for a triple-based approach (Thursday, 10 March)
• Re: [JSON] Survey for design requirements (Thursday, 10 March)
• Re: [JSON] Survey for design requirements (Thursday, 10 March)
• Re: [JSON] Survey for design requirements (Thursday, 10 March)
• [Graphs] BNode scope in RDF Datasets proposal (Wednesday, 9 March)
• Re: [JSON] Survey for design requirements (Wednesday, 9 March)
• Re: [Graphs] Proposal: RDF Datasets (Tuesday, 8 March)
• Re: [Graphs] Proposal: RDF Datasets (Tuesday, 8 March)
• Re: [Graphs] Proposal: RDF Datasets (Tuesday, 8 March)
• [Graphs] Proposal: RDF Datasets (Tuesday, 8 March)
• Re: Generic "Graph" Use Cases (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: Generic "Graph" Use Cases (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: Generic "Graph" Use Cases (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: Generic "Graph" Use Cases (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: [JSON] Survey for design requirements (Monday, 7 March)
• Re: Generic "Graph" Use Cases (Sunday, 6 March)
• Re: [JSON] Survey for design requirements (Sunday, 6 March)
• Re: RDF datasets and graph literals (Sunday, 6 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-5 (Graph Literals): Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? [RDF Graphs] (Sunday, 6 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-5 (Graph Literals): Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? [RDF Graphs] (Sunday, 6 March)
• Re: should we standardize things not yet widely deployed? (Sunday, 6 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Two formats (was: Re: Turtle, Qurtle, Super-Turtle, N-Triple, N-Quads, Trig - BC and Scope) (Saturday, 5 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-5 (Graph Literals): Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? [RDF Graphs] (Saturday, 5 March)
• [Turtle] Collecting the proposals (Saturday, 5 March)
• [Graphs] Use cases (Saturday, 5 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-5 (Graph Literals): Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? [RDF Graphs] (Saturday, 5 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-5 (Graph Literals): Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? [RDF Graphs] (Saturday, 5 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-5 (Graph Literals): Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? [RDF Graphs] (Saturday, 5 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-5 (Graph Literals): Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? [RDF Graphs] (Saturday, 5 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Two formats (Saturday, 5 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-5 (Graph Literals): Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? [RDF Graphs] (Saturday, 5 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Two formats (was: Re: Turtle, Qurtle, Super-Turtle, N-Triple, N-Quads, Trig - BC and Scope) (Friday, 4 March)
• Re: Semantics of Qurtle (N3 vs TriG), Graph Literals again. (Friday, 4 March)
• Re: [GRAPHS] FYI: VoID vocabulary just published (Thursday, 3 March)
• Re: a quick remark about blank nodes (Thursday, 3 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Two formats (Thursday, 3 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Two formats (was: Re: Turtle, Qurtle, Super-Turtle, N-Triple, N-Quads, Trig - BC and Scope) (Thursday, 3 March)
• Re: A modest proposal concerning blank nodes. (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: [GRAPHS] Follow your graph nose. (Wednesday, 2 March)
• [Turtle] Two formats (was: Re: Turtle, Qurtle, Super-Turtle, N-Triple, N-Quads, Trig - BC and Scope) (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Misc initial thoughts (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Misc initial thoughts (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Misc initial thoughts (Wednesday, 2 March)

Sandro Hawke

• Re: ISSUE-18: How do we parse "18." in Turtle? (Thursday, 31 March)
• Re: ISSUE-18: How do we parse "18." in Turtle? (Wednesday, 30 March)
• Re: [JSON] URI vs IRI (Wednesday, 30 March)
• Re: [ALL] Agenda 30 Mar telecon, 1100 EST (Tuesday, 29 March)
• [JSON] beating MongoDB (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] Elephant in the room (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] Examples for RDF JSON serializations side-by-side comparison (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] Examples for RDF JSON serializations side-by-side comparison (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] User segments update (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] Some general serialization "things" (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] Summary of direction discussion (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] new yellow box, proposed solution (Wednesday, 23 March)
• [JSON] new yellow box, proposed solution (Tuesday, 22 March)
• Re: [Graphs] g-text equivalence (Tuesday, 22 March)
• Re: [Graphs] g-text equivalence (Sunday, 20 March)
• [Graphs] g-text equivalence (Sunday, 20 March)
• Re: [JSON] one data point: Anzo on the Web (Friday, 18 March)
• Re: [Graphs] Fwd: Comments on "SPARQL 1.1 Uniform HTTP Protocol for Managing RDF Graphs" (Friday, 18 March)
• Re: [JSON] market segments - 6B solutions (Thursday, 17 March)
• Re: [JSON] market segments (Thursday, 17 March)
• [JSON] market segments (Thursday, 17 March)
• Re: [JSON] PROPOSAL: Syntax structure should be object-based (Wednesday, 16 March)
• Re: [JSON] object-based JSON vs. triple-based JSON (Thursday, 10 March)
• Re: [JSON] object-based JSON vs. triple-based JSON (Thursday, 10 March)
• Re: Is it possible to enable LaTeX support on the wiki? (Tuesday, 8 March)
• should we standardize things not yet widely deployed? (Sunday, 6 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Collecting the proposals (Sunday, 6 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-12 (String Literals): Reconcile various forms of string literals (time permitting) [Cleanup tasks] (Saturday, 5 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-12 (String Literals): deprecate language tags? (Saturday, 5 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-5 (Graph Literals): Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? [RDF Graphs] (Saturday, 5 March)
• Re: Semantics of Qurtle (N3 vs TriG), Graph Literals again. (Friday, 4 March)
• Re: Semantics of Qurtle (N3 vs TriG), Graph Literals again. (Friday, 4 March)
• Semantics of Qurtle (N3 vs TriG), Graph Literals again. (Friday, 4 March)
• Re: A modest proposal concerning blank nodes. (Thursday, 3 March)
• Re: Turtle, Qurtle, Super-Turtle, N-Triple, N-Quads, Trig - BC and Scope (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Re: bang ! in turtle (Wednesday, 2 March)
• [TURTLE] Extending Turtle before Rec (Tuesday, 1 March)

Souripriya Das

• Re: I cannot connect to the IRC (Wednesday, 16 March)
• Re: I cannot connect to the IRC (Wednesday, 16 March)
• Re: [ALL] Agenda telecon 2 Mar 11am EST (Wednesday, 2 March)

Steve Harris

• Re: [TTL] Long literals (Thursday, 31 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-17 (graph merge): How are RDF datasets to be merged? [RDF Graphs] (Tuesday, 29 March)
• Re: [JSON] RDF collections and JSON arrays (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: [JSON] RDF collections and JSON arrays (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: [JSON] RDF collections and JSON arrays (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: [JSON] RDF collections and JSON arrays (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: [JSON] beating MongoDB (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: [JSON] User segments update (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: [JSON] Elephant in the room (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: [JSON] Summary of direction discussion (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] Summary of direction discussion (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] new yellow box, proposed solution (Tuesday, 22 March)
• Re: [JSON] Meeting TOMORROW Monday, March 21st (Sunday, 20 March)
• Re: [JSON] market segments - 6B solutions (Thursday, 17 March)
• Re: [JSON] PROPOSAL: Syntax structure should be object-based (Wednesday, 16 March)
• Re: F2F Hotel recommendations? (Saturday, 12 March)
• Re: [JSON] JSON Syntax Options - URI Properties (Saturday, 12 March)
• F2F Hotel recommendations? (Friday, 11 March)
• Re: [JSON] object-based JSON vs. triple-based JSON (Wednesday, 9 March)
• Re: [Graphs] BNode scope in RDF Datasets proposal (Wednesday, 9 March)
• Re: RDF datasets and graph literals (Sunday, 6 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-5 (Graph Literals): Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? [RDF Graphs] (Sunday, 6 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-12 (String Literals): Reconcile various forms of string literals (time permitting) [Cleanup tasks] (Sunday, 6 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-12 (String Literals): deprecate language tags? (Sunday, 6 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-5 (Graph Literals): Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? [RDF Graphs] (Sunday, 6 March)
• Re: should we standardize things not yet widely deployed? (Sunday, 6 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-12 (String Literals): Reconcile various forms of string literals (time permitting) [Cleanup tasks] (Sunday, 6 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-12 (String Literals): Reconcile various forms of string literals (time permitting) [Cleanup tasks] (Sunday, 6 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Two formats (was: Re: Turtle, Qurtle, Super-Turtle, N-Triple, N-Quads, Trig - BC and Scope) (Sunday, 6 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-12 (String Literals): Reconcile various forms of string literals (time permitting) [Cleanup tasks] (Saturday, 5 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-5 (Graph Literals): Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? [RDF Graphs] (Saturday, 5 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-5 (Graph Literals): Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? [RDF Graphs] (Saturday, 5 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Two formats (was: Re: Turtle, Qurtle, Super-Turtle, N-Triple, N-Quads, Trig - BC and Scope) (Saturday, 5 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-5 (Graph Literals): Should we define Graph Literal datatypes? [RDF Graphs] (Saturday, 5 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Two formats (was: Re: Turtle, Qurtle, Super-Turtle, N-Triple, N-Quads, Trig - BC and Scope) (Thursday, 3 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Two formats (Thursday, 3 March)
• Re: A modest proposal concerning blank nodes. (Thursday, 3 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Two formats (was: Re: Turtle, Qurtle, Super-Turtle, N-Triple, N-Quads, Trig - BC and Scope) (Thursday, 3 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Misc initial thoughts (Thursday, 3 March)
• Re: bang ! in turtle (Wednesday, 2 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Re: bang ! in turtle (Wednesday, 2 March)

Thomas Steiner

• Re: [ALL] Agenda 30 Mar telecon, 1100 EST (Wednesday, 30 March)
• Re: [JSON] Consider Exhibit JSON? (Tuesday, 29 March)
• Re: [JSON] comments? (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: [JSON] Examples for RDF JSON serializations side-by-side comparison (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] Some general serialization "things" (Wednesday, 23 March)
• [JSON] Examples for RDF JSON serializations side-by-side comparison (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] data.nytimes (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] Summary of direction discussion (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] PROPOSAL: Syntax structure should be object-based (Wednesday, 16 March)
• Re: [JSON] the simple pivotal choice (Friday, 11 March)
• Re: [JSON] the simple pivotal choice (Friday, 11 March)
• Re: [JSON] Survey for design requirements (Friday, 11 March)
• Re: [JSON] The case for a triple-based approach (Thursday, 10 March)
• Re: [JSON] Survey for design requirements (Thursday, 10 March)
• Re: [JSON] Survey for design requirements (Thursday, 10 March)
• Re: [JSON] Survey for design requirements (Thursday, 10 March)
• Re: [JSON] the simple pivotal choice (Thursday, 10 March)
• Re: [JSON] the simple pivotal choice (Wednesday, 9 March)
• Re: [ALL] Agenda telecon 2 Mar 11am EST (Wednesday, 2 March)

William Waites

• Re: Apologies (Wednesday, 30 March)
• Re: What *is* RDF? (Friday, 25 March)
• (emphasising round-trip) Re: [JSON] Classifying the use cases (Friday, 25 March)
• Re: [JSON] Constraining JSON serialization discussion (Friday, 25 March)
• [JSON] usage example, JSON and RDF I/O in openbiblio (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] User segments update (Wednesday, 23 March)

Yves Raimond

• Re: ISSUE-18: How do we parse "18." in Turtle? (Wednesday, 30 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-17 (graph merge): How are RDF datasets to be merged? [RDF Graphs] (Monday, 28 March)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-17 (graph merge): How are RDF datasets to be merged? [RDF Graphs] (Monday, 28 March)
• Re: [JSON] PROPOSAL: Syntax structure should be object-based (Thursday, 17 March)
• Re: bang ! in turtle (Tuesday, 1 March)
• Re: [Turtle] Re: bang ! in turtle (Tuesday, 1 March)
• Re: bang ! in turtle (Tuesday, 1 March)

Zhe Wu

• Re: [JSON] Elephant in the room (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: [JSON] Elephant in the room (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: Which WG? (Friday, 18 March)
• regrets for the coming teleconference (Wednesday, 16 March)

Last message date: Thursday, 31 March 2011 23:08:19 UTC