Re: issue formatting [Re: the suggested initial goal]

https://w3c.github.io/sparql-exists/docs/sparql-exists.html

has an example for issue-1

james - please pick an issue and develop an example as you see it should be.

 Andy




On 13/07/16 17:15, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> On 07/13/2016 09:07 AM, james anderson wrote:
>> good evening;
>>
>>> On 2016-07-13, at 18:00, Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com
>>> <mailto:pfpschneider@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> […]
>>>
>>> need any dataset or intended solution for discussion to proceed?  Why does it
>>> even need "the pertinent query"?
>>>
>>> Examples can be useful to help push a discussion but a complete example is not
>>> necessary for this purpose.
>>
>> because i would intend to do a competent job to present the complete issue to
>> someone who comes into this in two or three years time wondering what the
>> issue was.
>>
>> having worked with the w3c documents over the past four years wrt respect to
>> rdf and sparql, it is clear that they do not accomplish that and that one
>> specific reason why they fail is that they fail to put all information in one
>> place in a consistent form.
>>
>> i would not intend to repeat that mistake.
>>
>> best regards, from berlin
>> ---
>> james anderson | james@dydra.com <mailto:james@dydra.com> | http://dydra.com
>
>
> At some time it might be necessary to have a complete example.  However, to
> repeat, why is this necessary to push discussion on a problem?  And if an
> example is necessary at some stage, then an example that can be easily run
> through a SPARQL impplementation appears to me to better than one that cannot.
>   If nicely-formatted version of the example is helpful, then the ones in the
> test case summary would fit the bill.
>
> I agree that the SPARQL specification is lacking in a lot of ways, but I don't
> see that it would have been any better if every discussion had to start with a
> complete non-machine-interpretable example.
>
>
> My point of view is that starting discussion should be easy and the
> information needed should be that that is needed for the discussion, not some
> rigid hard-to-generate and hard-to-read single example.
>
> peter
>

Received on Wednesday, 13 July 2016 17:40:02 UTC