W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sparql-dev@w3.org > April to June 2016

Re: Improving EXISTS

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 04:45:14 -0700
To: Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org>, public-sparql-dev@w3.org
Message-ID: <906b4ff4-741c-b487-2ed6-33ceb4a034b4@gmail.com>
I would join.

peter

On 06/30/2016 04:40 AM, Andy Seaborne wrote:
> There are bugs in the SPARQL specification with regards to EXISTS. The RDF
> Data Shapes working group uses EXISTS, and other related mechanisms, in SHACL
> [1].
> 
> W3C process for corrections is recognized generally to be inflexible. It
> is normally to wait for the next WG to run and end which is a multiyear
> cycle - that does not fit with the RDF Data Shapes WG timescale.
> 
> Community Groups can publish reports. These are not W3C standards. They
> do provide a way to record consensus or enumerate alternatives. This could be
> used to supplement the SPARQL errata process [2].
> 
> A suggestion is to use the W3C Community Group mechanism to describe a
> solution to this specific area in a timely manner. The CG would document a
> solution and create tests to pass over to the "RDF Tests" CG [3].  If there is
> no single consensus on one solution within the SPARQL community, including
> implementers and users, we can at least document a small set of approaches and
> note the approaches taken by implementations.
> 
> Thoughts and comments?
> 
> Please indicate if you would join such an effort.
> 
>     Andy
> 
> [1] http://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/shacl/
> [2] https://www.w3.org/2013/sparql-errata
> [3] https://www.w3.org/community/rdf-tests/
> 
> 
Received on Thursday, 30 June 2016 11:45:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 30 June 2016 11:45:49 UTC