- From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 17:55:22 +0100
- To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
On 31/05/13 17:00, Sandro Hawke wrote: > On 05/29/2013 01:47 PM, Steve Harris wrote: >> [ as a side note I find it bizarre that I'm having to advocate NOT >> changing a 14 >> year old, industrially deployed spec, at the 11th hour of the >> standardisation >> process, to add a feature that's used by a tiny minority of deployed >> systems - >> if anything was to strike an outsider as peculiar about this WGs >> process, it >> would surely be this feature ] > > I don't understand this complaint at all. This Working Group is > chartered to provide a standard mechanism for working with and sharing > multiple graphs. In the chartering process in 2010, our various inputs > all said this was a very high priority. A lot of folks said to add > Named Graphs or fix reification or something like that. Specifically, blank nodes for graph names, not datasets in general. Andy
Received on Friday, 31 May 2013 16:55:55 UTC