- From: Gregory Williams <greg@evilfunhouse.com>
- Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 08:15:32 -0700
- To: Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org>
- Cc: public-sparql-dev@w3.org
On Jun 30, 2016, at 4:40 AM, Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org> 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. I'd join. thanks, .greg
Received on Thursday, 30 June 2016 15:15:57 UTC