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

Alex Hall

• Re: Scope of blank nodes in SPARQL? (Wednesday, 19 October)
• Re: "Simple Lists" (was Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24)) (Wednesday, 19 October)
• Re: Re: Scope of blank nodes in SPARQL? (Wednesday, 19 October)
• Scope of blank nodes in SPARQL? (Tuesday, 18 October)
• Re: Scope of blank nodes in TriG? (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: Datasets and contextual/temporal semantics (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: Dilbert example - defining hasCubicle (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: Web Semantics of Datasets (v0.2) (Wednesday, 12 October)
• Re: Unicode NFC - status, and RDF Concepts (Monday, 10 October)
• Re: Unicode NFC - status, and RDF Concepts (Monday, 10 October)
• Re: [ALL] 48 Hours to Prioritize Graph Use Cases (Thursday, 6 October)

Andy Seaborne

• Re: Blank Node Ordering (Friday, 28 October)
• Re: proposals for Lists and Seq (ISSUE-77) (Friday, 21 October)
• Re: proposals for Lists and Seq (ISSUE-77) (Friday, 21 October)
• Re: proposals for Lists and Seq (ISSUE-77) (Friday, 21 October)
• Re: Scope of blank nodes in SPARQL? (Friday, 21 October)
• Re: proposal to close ISSUE-77 (Re: [ALL} agenda telecon Oct 19) (Wednesday, 19 October)
• Re: proposal to close ISSUE-77 (Re: [ALL} agenda telecon Oct 19) (Wednesday, 19 October)
• Re: Dataset semantics (Wednesday, 19 October)
• Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24) (Wednesday, 19 October)
• Re: proposal to close ISSUE-77 (Re: [ALL} agenda telecon Oct 19) (Wednesday, 19 October)
• RDF Collections (Wednesday, 19 October)
• Re: proposal to close ISSUE-77 (Re: [ALL} agenda telecon Oct 19) (Wednesday, 19 October)
• Re: Scope of blank nodes in SPARQL? (Tuesday, 18 October)
• Re: "Simple Lists" (was Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24)) (Monday, 17 October)
• Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24) (Sunday, 16 October)
• Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24) (Saturday, 15 October)
• Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24) (Saturday, 15 October)
• Re: Scope of blank nodes in TriG? (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: Unicode NFC - status, and RDF Concepts (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: Contexts of use, a semantic idea (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-78 (Doc-datasets): Document Convention for Using Datasets [RDF Primer] (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: Scope of blank nodes in TriG? (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: Strawpoll proposals on terminology (Thursday, 13 October)
• Re: Contexts of use, a semantic idea (Thursday, 13 October)
• (no subject) (Wednesday, 12 October)
• Re: Time-varying g-boxes : a dataset pattern (Tuesday, 11 October)
• Time-varying g-boxes : a dataset pattern (Tuesday, 11 October)
• Re: Web Semantics for Datasets (Monday, 10 October)
• Re: Unicode NFC - status, and RDF Concepts (Monday, 10 October)
• RDF Concepts - bad reference? (Sunday, 9 October)
• Re: Web Semantics for Datasets (Saturday, 8 October)
• Re: Web Semantics for Datasets (Saturday, 8 October)
• Re: Web Semantics for Datasets (Friday, 7 October)
• Re: Web Semantics for Datasets (Friday, 7 October)
• Re: [ALL] 48 Hours to Prioritize Graph Use Cases (Thursday, 6 October)
• Re: [ALL] 48 Hours to Prioritize Graph Use Cases (Thursday, 6 October)
• Re: [ALL] 48 Hours to Prioritize Graph Use Cases (Thursday, 6 October)
• Re: [ALL] 48 Hours to Prioritize Graph Use Cases (Wednesday, 5 October)
• Re: Graph labels vs. graph names. (Wednesday, 5 October)
• Re: why I don't like default graphs in the DATASET proposal (Sunday, 2 October)
• Re: complete graphs (Saturday, 1 October)

Antoine Zimmermann

• Re: proposals for Lists and Seq (ISSUE-77) (Thursday, 20 October)
• Dataset semantics (Tuesday, 18 October)
• Re: [ALL] 48 Hours to Prioritize Graph Use Cases (Wednesday, 12 October)

Arnaud Le Hors

• Fw: W3C Workshop on Linked Enterprise Data Patterns: Data-driven Applications on the Web (Call for Participation) (Monday, 17 October)
• Re: today's minutes available (Monday, 3 October)
• Re: On Graph is in Turtle (was Re: today's minutes available) (Monday, 3 October)

Bauer, Herbert S. (Scott)

• RE: [ALL] 48 Hours to Prioritize Graph Use Cases (Thursday, 6 October)

Charles Greer

• Hello all, just joined the WG (Monday, 24 October)

Dan Brickley

• Re: proposals for Lists and Seq (ISSUE-77) (Thursday, 20 October)
• Re: proposals for Lists and Seq (ISSUE-77) (Thursday, 20 October)
• Re: proposal to close ISSUE-77 (Re: [ALL} agenda telecon Oct 19) (Thursday, 20 October)
• Re: proposals for Lists and Seq (ISSUE-77) (Thursday, 20 October)
• Re: proposal to close ISSUE-77 (Re: [ALL} agenda telecon Oct 19) (Wednesday, 19 October)
• Re: proposal to close ISSUE-77 (Re: [ALL} agenda telecon Oct 19) (Wednesday, 19 October)
• Re: "Simple Lists" (was Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24)) (Wednesday, 19 October)
• Re: "Simple Lists" (was Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24)) (Monday, 17 October)
• Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24) (Saturday, 15 October)
• Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24) (Saturday, 15 October)
• Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24) (Saturday, 15 October)
• Re: Datasets and contextual/temporal semantics (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24) (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: more about dereference (notes from MIT post F2F2-day-1) (Thursday, 13 October)
• Re: Possible named graph issue (Friday, 14 October)
• Dilbert example - defining hasCubicle (Thursday, 13 October)
• Re: Datasets and contextual/temporal semantics (Thursday, 13 October)
• test cases - sketches (Wednesday, 12 October)
• Re: Web Semantics of Datasets (v0.2) (Monday, 10 October)
• Re: Web Semantics for Datasets (Friday, 7 October)
• Re: why I don't like named graph IRIs in the DATASET proposal (Saturday, 1 October)

David Wood

• Fwd: Blank Node Ordering (Thursday, 27 October)
• Re: Hello all, just joined the WG (Tuesday, 25 October)
• [ALL] Telecon Cancelled This Week (Monday, 24 October)
• Re: Close ISSUE-76? (Tuesday, 18 October)
• Able to Edit RDF/XML? (Tuesday, 18 October)
• Co-editor on RDF 1.1 Vocabulary? (Tuesday, 18 October)
• Close ISSUE-76? (Tuesday, 18 October)
• Re: Dilbert example - defining hasCubicle (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: Dilbert example - defining hasCubicle (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: thx to both hosts (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: Possible named graph issue (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: [Admin] use of email addresses (Wednesday, 12 October)
• Re: Unicode NFC - status, and RDF Concepts (Wednesday, 12 October)
• Re: Web Semantics of Datasets (v0.2) (Wednesday, 12 October)
• Re: Unicode NFC - status, and RDF Concepts (Tuesday, 11 October)
• Re: Provenance Data Model FPWD (Tuesday, 11 October)
• Re: Unicode NFC - status, and RDF Concepts (Tuesday, 11 October)
• Provenance Data Model FPWD (Tuesday, 11 October)
• Re: Time-varying g-boxes : a dataset pattern (Tuesday, 11 October)
• Re: Time-varying g-boxes : a dataset pattern (Tuesday, 11 October)
• Re: Affiliation Change (Tuesday, 11 October)
• Re: Unicode NFC - status, and RDF Concepts (Monday, 10 October)
• [GRAPH] RDF WG Issues Relating to the Graph TF (Monday, 10 October)
• Re: [ALL] 48 Hours to Prioritize Graph Use Cases (Monday, 10 October)
• [MIT Attendees] Breakfast before FTF2 (Monday, 10 October)
• [ALL] FTF2 Attendance (Monday, 10 October)
• [ALL] Scribes List Updated (Wednesday, 5 October)
• [ALL] 48 Hours to Prioritize Graph Use Cases (Wednesday, 5 October)
• [ALL] Agenda for 5 Oct 2011 (Tuesday, 4 October)

Eric Prud'hommeaux

• Re: Scope of blank nodes in SPARQL? (Wednesday, 19 October)
• Re: Re: Scope of blank nodes in SPARQL? (Wednesday, 19 October)
• Re: Unicode NFC - status, and RDF Concepts (Tuesday, 11 October)
• Re: Unicode NFC - status, and RDF Concepts (Monday, 10 October)
• Re: Unicode NFC - status, and RDF Concepts (Monday, 10 October)
• Re: Unicode NFC - status, and RDF Concepts (Monday, 10 October)
• Re: Web Semantics for Datasets (Saturday, 8 October)
• Re: Re: Web Semantics for Datasets (Friday, 7 October)
• Re: why I don't like named graph IRIs in the DATASET proposal (Sunday, 2 October)
• Re: why I don't like named graph IRIs in the DATASET proposal (Saturday, 1 October)

Gavin Carothers

• Minutes of 19 October 2011 (Wednesday, 19 October)
• TriG (Wednesday, 19 October)
• Re: What is really a graph container? Re: more about dereference (notes from MIT post F2F2-day-1) (Saturday, 15 October)
• Affiliation Change (Tuesday, 11 October)

Guus Schreiber

• Re: What is really a graph container? Re: more about dereference (notes from MIT post F2F2-day-1) (Wednesday, 19 October)
• [ALL} agenda telecon Oct 19 (Tuesday, 18 October)
• thx to both hosts (Friday, 14 October)

Ian Davis

• Re: Regrets (Wednesday, 19 October)
• Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24) (Saturday, 15 October)
• Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24) (Saturday, 15 October)
• Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24) (Saturday, 15 October)
• Re: "Simple Lists" (was Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24)) (Saturday, 15 October)
• Re: RDF-ISSUE-78 (Doc-datasets): Document Convention for Using Datasets [RDF Primer] (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: Scope of blank nodes in TriG? (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: Scope of blank nodes in TriG? (Friday, 14 October)
• Scope of blank nodes in TriG? (Friday, 14 October)
• Possible named graph issue (Thursday, 13 October)
• ISSUE-25 Talis Position (Thursday, 13 October)
• Re: <sandro> PatHayes, can you formally define g-box for us? (Thursday, 13 October)
• Re: <sandro> PatHayes, can you formally define g-box for us? (Thursday, 13 October)
• Re: <sandro> PatHayes, can you formally define g-box for us? (Thursday, 13 October)
• Re: <sandro> PatHayes, can you formally define g-box for us? (Thursday, 13 October)
• Defining graphs with RDF (Wednesday, 12 October)
• Strawpoll proposals on terminology (Wednesday, 12 October)
• Re: [Admin] use of email addresses (Wednesday, 12 October)
• Re: Web Semantics for Datasets (Friday, 7 October)
• Re: Web Semantics for Datasets (Friday, 7 October)
• Re: why I don't like named graph IRIs in the DATASET proposal (Friday, 7 October)
• Re: [ALL] 48 Hours to Prioritize Graph Use Cases (Wednesday, 5 October)
• Re: why I don't like named graph IRIs in the DATASET proposal (Wednesday, 5 October)
• Re: why I don't like default graphs in the DATASET proposal (Saturday, 1 October)
• Re: why I don't like named graph IRIs in the DATASET proposal (Tuesday, 4 October)

Ivan Herman

• Important! Fwd: Daylight Savings Time change (Monday, 24 October)
• Re: proposals for Lists and Seq (ISSUE-77) (Thursday, 20 October)
• Re: proposals for Lists and Seq (ISSUE-77) (Thursday, 20 October)
• Re: Proposed modification to resolution of ISSUE 71: value space of rdf:langString (Thursday, 20 October)
• Re: proposals for Lists and Seq (ISSUE-77) (Thursday, 20 October)
• Re: proposal to close ISSUE-77 (Re: [ALL} agenda telecon Oct 19) (Wednesday, 19 October)
• Re: proposal to close ISSUE-77 (Re: [ALL} agenda telecon Oct 19) (Wednesday, 19 October)
• Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24) (Saturday, 15 October)
• Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24) (Saturday, 15 October)
• Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24) (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24) (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: [Moderator Action] Re: Unicode NFC - status, and RDF Concepts (Thursday, 13 October)
• Re: [Admin] use of email addresses (Wednesday, 12 October)
• [Admin] use of email addresses (Wednesday, 12 October)
• Re: phoning into F2F? (Wednesday, 12 October)
• Re: The "Rolling Snapshots" Pattern and Vocabulary (Wednesday, 12 October)
• Re: Affiliation Change (Tuesday, 11 October)
• Re: Web Semantics of Datasets (v0.2) (Monday, 10 October)
• Re: Web Semantics for Datasets (Friday, 7 October)
• Re: Web Semantics for Datasets (Friday, 7 October)
• Re: [ALL] 48 Hours to Prioritize Graph Use Cases (Thursday, 6 October)
• Re: [Turtle] in HTML (Wednesday, 5 October)
• Re: Admin : comments lists (Monday, 3 October)

Jeremy Carroll

• Re: Proposed modification to resolution of ISSUE 71: value space of rdf:langString (Thursday, 20 October)
• Proposed modification to resolution of ISSUE 71: value space of rdf:langString (Thursday, 20 October)
• Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24) (Saturday, 15 October)
• Re: Scope of blank nodes in TriG? (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: Dilbert example - defining hasCubicle (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: Datasets and contextual/temporal semantics (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: Datasets and contextual/temporal semantics (Friday, 14 October)
• sub-datasets ... (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: Datasets and contextual/temporal semantics (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: Datasets and contextual/temporal semantics (Thursday, 13 October)
• Re: more about dereference (notes from MIT post F2F2-day-1) (Thursday, 13 October)
• Re: Dilbert example - defining hasCubicle (Thursday, 13 October)
• Re: [Admin] use of email addresses (Wednesday, 12 October)
• Re: Drfit .... ancient minutes Re: Unicode NFC - status, and RDF Concepts (Wednesday, 12 October)
• Drfit .... ancient minutes Re: Unicode NFC - status, and RDF Concepts (Wednesday, 12 October)
• Re: Unicode NFC - status, and RDF Concepts (Wednesday, 12 October)
• Re: Unicode NFC - status, and RDF Concepts (Tuesday, 11 October)
• Re: Web Semantics of Datasets (v0.2) (Monday, 10 October)
• Unicode NFC - status, and RDF Concepts (Monday, 10 October)
• Re: RDF Concepts - bad reference? (Monday, 10 October)
• Re: Graph labels vs. graph names. (Thursday, 6 October)

John Cowan

• Re: Unicode NFC - status, and RDF Concepts (Monday, 10 October)

Lee Feigenbaum

• Re: [ALL] 48 Hours to Prioritize Graph Use Cases (Thursday, 6 October)
• Re: why I don't like default graphs in the DATASET proposal (Sunday, 2 October)

Leif Halvard Silli

• RE: Unicode NFC - status, and RDF Concepts (Wednesday, 12 October)
• Re: Unicode NFC - status, and RDF Concepts (Wednesday, 12 October)

Manu Sporny

• RDFa 1.1 and plain literals (Monday, 10 October)

Martin J. Dürst

• Re: Unicode NFC - status, and RDF Concepts (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: Unicode NFC - status, and RDF Concepts (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: Unicode NFC - status, and RDF Concepts (Thursday, 13 October)
• Re: Unicode NFC - status, and RDF Concepts (Thursday, 13 October)
• Re: Unicode NFC - status, and RDF Concepts (Tuesday, 11 October)
• Re: Unicode NFC - status, and RDF Concepts (Monday, 10 October)

Matteo Brunati

• Re: [ALL] FTF2 Attendance (Wednesday, 12 October)

Mischa Tuffield

• Regrets (Wednesday, 19 October)

Pat Hayes

• Re: proposal to close ISSUE-77 (Re: [ALL} agenda telecon Oct 19) (Thursday, 20 October)
• Re: proposal to close ISSUE-77 (Re: [ALL} agenda telecon Oct 19) (Thursday, 20 October)
• Re: proposal to close ISSUE-77 (Re: [ALL} agenda telecon Oct 19) (Wednesday, 19 October)
• Re: RDF Collections (Wednesday, 19 October)
• Re: proposal to close ISSUE-77 (Re: [ALL} agenda telecon Oct 19) (Wednesday, 19 October)
• Re: "Simple Lists" (was Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24)) (Wednesday, 19 October)
• Re: Close ISSUE-76? (Tuesday, 18 October)
• Re: "Simple Lists" (was Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24)) (Monday, 17 October)
• Re: "Simple Lists" (was Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24)) (Monday, 17 October)
• Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24) (Monday, 17 October)
• Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24) (Monday, 17 October)
• Re: Contexts of use, a semantic idea (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: Datasets and contextual/temporal semantics (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: Datasets and contextual/temporal semantics (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: more about dereference (notes from MIT post F2F2-day-1) (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: Datasets and contextual/temporal semantics (Thursday, 13 October)
• Re: <sandro> PatHayes, can you formally define g-box for us? (Thursday, 13 October)
• Re: Datasets and contextual/temporal semantics (Thursday, 13 October)
• Re: <sandro> PatHayes, can you formally define g-box for us? (Thursday, 13 October)
• Re: <sandro> PatHayes, can you formally define g-box for us? (Thursday, 13 October)
• Contexts of use, a semantic idea (Thursday, 13 October)
• <sandro> PatHayes, can you formally define g-box for us? (Thursday, 13 October)
• Re: more about dereference (notes from MIT post F2F2-day-1) (Thursday, 13 October)
• Re: more about dereference (notes from MIT post F2F2-day-1) (Thursday, 13 October)
• Re: Strawpoll proposals on terminology (Thursday, 13 October)
• Re: Web Semantics of Datasets (v0.2) (Wednesday, 12 October)
• Re: "options" -- an enumeration of the "graphs" design space (Wednesday, 12 October)
• Re: Web Semantics of Datasets (v0.2) (Wednesday, 12 October)
• phoning into F2F? (Wednesday, 12 October)
• Re: Web Semantics of Datasets (v0.2) (Wednesday, 12 October)
• Re: Web Semantics of Datasets (v0.2) (Monday, 10 October)
• Re: Web Semantics of Datasets (v0.2) (Monday, 10 October)
• Re: why I don't like named graph IRIs in the DATASET proposal (Saturday, 8 October)
• Re: why I don't like named graph IRIs in the DATASET proposal (Saturday, 8 October)
• Re: why I don't like named graph IRIs in the DATASET proposal (Thursday, 6 October)
• Re: why I don't like named graph IRIs in the DATASET proposal (Wednesday, 5 October)
• Re: why I don't like named graph IRIs in the DATASET proposal (Wednesday, 5 October)
• Re: Graph labels vs. graph names. (was: Re: complete graphs) (Wednesday, 5 October)
• Re: why I don't like named graph IRIs in the DATASET proposal (Wednesday, 5 October)
• Re: Graph labels vs. graph names. (was: Re: complete graphs) (Wednesday, 5 October)
• Re: why I don't like named graph IRIs in the DATASET proposal (Wednesday, 5 October)
• Graph labels vs. graph names. (was: Re: complete graphs) (Wednesday, 5 October)
• Re: complete graphs (Monday, 3 October)
• Re: complete graphs (Monday, 3 October)
• Re: why I don't like named graph IRIs in the DATASET proposal (Monday, 3 October)
• Re: why I don't like named graph IRIs in the DATASET proposal (Monday, 3 October)

Peter Frederick Patel-Schneider

• Re: Strawpoll proposals on terminology (Thursday, 13 October)
• Re: more about dereference (notes from MIT post F2F2-day-1) (Thursday, 13 October)
• Re: more about dereference (notes from MIT post F2F2-day-1) (Thursday, 13 October)
• Re: more about dereference (notes from MIT post F2F2-day-1) (Thursday, 13 October)
• Re: Web Semantics for Datasets (Friday, 7 October)
• Re: Web Semantics for Datasets (Friday, 7 October)
• Re: why I don't like named graph IRIs in the DATASET proposal (Friday, 7 October)
• Re: why I don't like named graph IRIs in the DATASET proposal (Thursday, 6 October)
• Re: [ALL] 48 Hours to Prioritize Graph Use Cases (Thursday, 6 October)

Phillips, Addison

• RE: Unicode NFC - status, and RDF Concepts (Friday, 14 October)
• RE: Unicode NFC - status, and RDF Concepts (Wednesday, 12 October)
• Re: Unicode NFC - status, and RDF Concepts (Tuesday, 11 October)
• RE: Unicode NFC - status, and RDF Concepts (Tuesday, 11 October)
• RE: Unicode NFC - status, and RDF Concepts (Tuesday, 11 October)
• RE: Unicode NFC - status, and RDF Concepts (Monday, 10 October)

Pierre-Antoine Champin

• Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24) (Wednesday, 19 October)
• Re: sub-datasets ... (Wednesday, 19 October)
• Re: What is really a graph container? Re: more about dereference (notes from MIT post F2F2-day-1) (Wednesday, 19 October)
• Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24) (Wednesday, 19 October)
• Re: sub-datasets ... (Wednesday, 19 October)
• Re: What is really a graph container? Re: more about dereference (notes from MIT post F2F2-day-1) (Wednesday, 19 October)
• Re: What is really a graph container? Re: more about dereference (notes from MIT post F2F2-day-1) (Wednesday, 19 October)
• Re: test cases - sketches (Friday, 14 October)
• What is really a graph container? Re: more about dereference (notes from MIT post F2F2-day-1) (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: <sandro> PatHayes, can you formally define g-box for us? (Thursday, 13 October)
• Re: why I don't like named graph IRIs in the DATASET proposal (Wednesday, 5 October)
• Re: why I don't like named graph IRIs in the DATASET proposal (Tuesday, 4 October)
• Re: why I don't like named graph IRIs in the DATASET proposal (Sunday, 2 October)

RDF Working Group Issue Tracker

• RDF-ISSUE-78 (Doc-datasets): Document Convention for Using Datasets [RDF Primer] (Friday, 14 October)
• ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24) (Thursday, 13 October)

Richard Cyganiak

• Re: "Simple Lists" (was Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24)) (Monday, 17 October)
• Re: Scope of blank nodes in TriG? (Monday, 17 October)
• Re: Scope of blank nodes in TriG? (Monday, 17 October)
• Re: "Simple Lists" (was Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24)) (Monday, 17 October)
• Re: Scope of blank nodes in TriG? (Monday, 17 October)
• Re: <sandro> PatHayes, can you formally define g-box for us? (Thursday, 13 October)
• Re: more about dereference (notes from MIT post F2F2-day-1) (Thursday, 13 October)
• Re: Proposed resolution for ISSUE 71 Language-typed literals (Thursday, 13 October)
• Re: <sandro> PatHayes, can you formally define g-box for us? (Thursday, 13 October)
• Re: more about dereference (notes from MIT post F2F2-day-1) (Thursday, 13 October)
• Datasets and contextual/temporal semantics (Thursday, 13 October)
• Re: Strawpoll proposals on terminology (Thursday, 13 October)
• Re: Web Semantics for Datasets (Friday, 7 October)
• Re: Web Semantics for Datasets (Friday, 7 October)
• Re: Web Semantics for Datasets (Friday, 7 October)
• Re: Web Semantics for Datasets (Friday, 7 October)
• Re: [ALL] 48 Hours to Prioritize Graph Use Cases (Thursday, 6 October)
• Re: Graph labels vs. graph names. (was: Re: complete graphs) (Wednesday, 5 October)
• Re: why I don't like named graph IRIs in the DATASET proposal (Wednesday, 5 October)
• Re: Graph labels vs. graph names. (was: Re: complete graphs) (Wednesday, 5 October)
• Re: Graph labels vs. graph names. (was: Re: complete graphs) (Wednesday, 5 October)
• Re: why I don't like named graph IRIs in the DATASET proposal (Wednesday, 5 October)
• Re: why I don't like named graph IRIs in the DATASET proposal (Tuesday, 4 October)
• Re: complete graphs (Tuesday, 4 October)
• Re: complete graphs (Tuesday, 4 October)
• Re: why I don't like named graph IRIs in the DATASET proposal (Tuesday, 4 October)
• Re: why I don't like named graph IRIs in the DATASET proposal (Tuesday, 4 October)
• Re: why I don't like named graph IRIs in the DATASET proposal (Tuesday, 4 October)
• Re: why I don't like named graph IRIs in the DATASET proposal (Sunday, 2 October)
• Re: the word "reasoning" (Sunday, 2 October)
• Re: why I don't like default graphs in the DATASET proposal (Sunday, 2 October)
• Re: why I don't like named graph IRIs in the DATASET proposal (Sunday, 2 October)
• Re: why I don't like named graph IRIs in the DATASET proposal (Sunday, 2 October)
• Re: why I don't like named graph IRIs in the DATASET proposal (Saturday, 1 October)
• Re: why I don't like named graph IRIs in the DATASET proposal (Saturday, 1 October)
• Re: why I don't like default graphs in the DATASET proposal (Saturday, 1 October)
• Re: complete graphs (Saturday, 1 October)
• Re: complete graphs (Saturday, 1 October)

Sandro Hawke

• Re: proposals for Lists and Seq (ISSUE-77) (Thursday, 20 October)
• Re: proposals for Lists and Seq (ISSUE-77) (Thursday, 20 October)
• proposals for Lists and Seq (ISSUE-77) (Wednesday, 19 October)
• Re: proposal to close ISSUE-77 (Re: [ALL} agenda telecon Oct 19) (Wednesday, 19 October)
• Re: proposal to close ISSUE-77 (Re: [ALL} agenda telecon Oct 19) (Wednesday, 19 October)
• Re: RDF Collections (Wednesday, 19 October)
• Re: proposal to close ISSUE-77 (Re: [ALL} agenda telecon Oct 19) (Wednesday, 19 October)
• proposal to close ISSUE-77 (Re: [ALL} agenda telecon Oct 19) (Wednesday, 19 October)
• Re: "Simple Lists" (was Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24)) (Monday, 17 October)
• Re: "Simple Lists" (was Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24)) (Monday, 17 October)
• Re: "Simple Lists" (was Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24)) (Monday, 17 October)
• Re: "Simple Lists" (was Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24)) (Monday, 17 October)
• Re: "Simple Lists" (was Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24)) (Sunday, 16 October)
• "Simple Lists" (was Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24)) (Saturday, 15 October)
• Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24) (Saturday, 15 October)
• Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24) (Saturday, 15 October)
• Re: sub-datasets ... (Saturday, 15 October)
• Re: What is really a graph container? Re: more about dereference (notes from MIT post F2F2-day-1) (Saturday, 15 October)
• Re: Datasets and contextual/temporal semantics (Saturday, 15 October)
• Re: Datasets and contextual/temporal semantics (Friday, 14 October)
• modeling SPARQL update - a GRAPHS challenge (test case?) (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: Datasets and contextual/temporal semantics (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: more about dereference (notes from MIT post F2F2-day-1) (Thursday, 13 October)
• Agenda suggestion (Thursday, 13 October)
• Re: Strawpoll proposals on terminology (Thursday, 13 October)
• more about dereference (notes from MIT post F2F2-day-1) (Wednesday, 12 October)
• "options" -- an enumeration of the "graphs" design space (Wednesday, 12 October)
• Re: Time-varying g-boxes : a dataset pattern (Tuesday, 11 October)
• The "Rolling Snapshots" Pattern and Vocabulary (Tuesday, 11 October)
• Semantic Web Meetup *tonight* at MIT (Tuesday, 11 October)
• Re: Web Semantics of Datasets (v0.2) (Tuesday, 11 October)
• Re: Web Semantics of Datasets (v0.2) (Tuesday, 11 October)
• Re: Web Semantics of Datasets (v0.2) (Monday, 10 October)
• Re: Web Semantics of Datasets (v0.2) (Monday, 10 October)
• Web Semantics of Datasets (v0.2) (Monday, 10 October)
• Re: Web Semantics for Datasets (Monday, 10 October)
• Re: Web Semantics for Datasets (Saturday, 8 October)
• Re: Web Semantics for Datasets (Friday, 7 October)
• Re: Web Semantics for Datasets (Friday, 7 October)
• Re: Web Semantics for Datasets (Friday, 7 October)
• Re: Web Semantics for Datasets (Friday, 7 October)
• Re: Web Semantics for Datasets (Friday, 7 October)
• Web Semantics for Datasets (Friday, 7 October)
• Re: Graph labels vs. graph names. (was: Re: complete graphs) (Wednesday, 5 October)
• Re: Graph labels vs. graph names. (was: Re: complete graphs) (Wednesday, 5 October)
• Re: Graph labels vs. graph names. (was: Re: complete graphs) (Wednesday, 5 October)
• Re: Graph labels vs. graph names. (was: Re: complete graphs) (Wednesday, 5 October)
• Re: why I don't like named graph IRIs in the DATASET proposal (Tuesday, 4 October)
• Re: why I don't like named graph IRIs in the DATASET proposal (Saturday, 1 October)
• Re: complete graphs (Saturday, 1 October)
• the word "reasoning" (Saturday, 1 October)

Schreiber, A.T.

• Proposed resolution for ISSUE 71 Language-typed literals (Thursday, 13 October)

Steve Harris

• Re: Blank Node Ordering (Friday, 28 October)
• Re: proposals for Lists and Seq (ISSUE-77) (Friday, 21 October)
• Re: proposals for Lists and Seq (ISSUE-77) (Thursday, 20 October)
• Re: proposals for Lists and Seq (ISSUE-77) (Thursday, 20 October)
• Re: proposals for Lists and Seq (ISSUE-77) (Thursday, 20 October)
• Re: proposal to close ISSUE-77 (Re: [ALL} agenda telecon Oct 19) (Thursday, 20 October)
• Re: proposals for Lists and Seq (ISSUE-77) (Thursday, 20 October)
• Re: proposal to close ISSUE-77 (Re: [ALL} agenda telecon Oct 19) (Thursday, 20 October)
• Re: "Simple Lists" (was Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24)) (Wednesday, 19 October)
• Re: "Simple Lists" (was Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24)) (Wednesday, 19 October)
• Re: Scope of blank nodes in TriG? (Monday, 17 October)
• Re: Scope of blank nodes in TriG? (Monday, 17 October)
• Re: "Simple Lists" (was Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24)) (Monday, 17 October)
• Re: "Simple Lists" (was Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24)) (Monday, 17 October)
• Re: "Simple Lists" (was Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24)) (Sunday, 16 October)
• Re: "Simple Lists" (was Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24)) (Sunday, 16 October)
• Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24) (Saturday, 15 October)
• Re: Scope of blank nodes in TriG? (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: Scope of blank nodes in TriG? (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: ISSUE-77: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24) (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: Datasets and contextual/temporal semantics (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: Provenance Data Model FPWD (Tuesday, 11 October)
• Re: Provenance Data Model FPWD (Tuesday, 11 October)
• Re: Web Semantics of Datasets (v0.2) (Monday, 10 October)
• Re: Web Semantics of Datasets (v0.2) (Monday, 10 October)
• Re: Web Semantics for Datasets (Friday, 7 October)
• Re: Web Semantics for Datasets (Friday, 7 October)
• Re: [ALL] 48 Hours to Prioritize Graph Use Cases (Thursday, 6 October)
• Re: [ALL] 48 Hours to Prioritize Graph Use Cases (Thursday, 6 October)
• Re: [ALL] 48 Hours to Prioritize Graph Use Cases (Thursday, 6 October)
• Re: Graph labels vs. graph names. (was: Re: complete graphs) (Wednesday, 5 October)
• Re: Graph labels vs. graph names. (was: Re: complete graphs) (Wednesday, 5 October)

Thomas Steiner

• Regrets (Wednesday, 19 October)

William Waites

• Re: Scope of blank nodes in TriG? (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: Datasets and contextual/temporal semantics (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: Scope of blank nodes in TriG? (Friday, 14 October)
• Re: <sandro> PatHayes, can you formally define g-box for us? (Thursday, 13 October)
• Re: complete graphs (Wednesday, 5 October)
• Re: complete graphs (Tuesday, 4 October)

Yves Raimond

• Re: sub-datasets ... (Thursday, 20 October)
• Re: Regrets (Wednesday, 19 October)
• Re: [ALL] 48 Hours to Prioritize Graph Use Cases (Thursday, 6 October)

Zhe Wu

• Regrets (Wednesday, 5 October)

Last message date: Friday, 28 October 2011 09:48:53 UTC