On Jun 30, 2016, at 4:40 AM, Andy Seaborne <a...@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
