- From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2012 08:59:17 -0500
- To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Cc: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
On Wed, 2012-02-01 at 11:23 -0500, Kingsley Idehen wrote: > On 2/1/12 11:16 AM, Sandro Hawke wrote: > > I'm not opposed to quads or SPARQL at all; I'm just trying to understand > > what's reasonable to add (or even change *shudder*) to provide solutions > > for the use cases. > > > > -- Sandro > I truly believe, use cases will come from field use across industry. > When this happens en masse, and the limitations of existing specs and > implementations a prohibitively taxed, there will be an obvious > trigger for RDF v.Next. Until then, tinkering with what's in the midst > of a prolonged and protracted bootstrap will always meet coherent and > pragmatic resistance :-) I think I agree, but how can a Next Version happen under the pressure of everyone needing it Right Now? -- Sandro > -- > > Regards, > > Kingsley Idehen > Founder & CEO > OpenLink Software > Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com > Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen > Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen > Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about > LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen > > > >
Received on Wednesday, 8 February 2012 14:01:28 UTC