W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-hydra@w3.org > July 2014

Re: 404 Re: Comments on the Triple Patterns Fragments draft

From: Kjetil Kjernsmo <kjetil@kjernsmo.net>
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2014 00:00:52 +0200
To: public-hydra@w3.org
Message-Id: <201408010000.53002.kjetil@kjernsmo.net>
On Thursday 31. July 2014 22.55.59 David Booth wrote:
> I should add that requiring the client to special case the 404 result 
> may be particularly unpleasant for the client programmer, because it 
> breaks separation levels: it forces an error code to be reinterpreted as 
> a legitimate data result, so the code cannot cleanly process error codes 
> separately from legitimate data results.  It is qualitatively different 
> from, for example, deciding at the business logic level to process 1 
> result differently than 5 results.

I'm with Ruben here, I would certainly not be required to interprete the 
payload of the error separately. I don't know about other environments 

The whole difference is that with a 200, I would have to parse the payload to 
see if there was an empty result, with 404, I can safely conclude already 
once the HTTP response is parsed. 

For a SPARQL implementation on the top of LDF, that sounds like huge win to 
me: If a single triple pattern of a BGP returns a 404, I can stop processing 
that BGP and return an empty result for the whole BGP, while I would have to 
parse the result if it returned a 200 for every triple pattern.


Received on Thursday, 31 July 2014 22:01:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:29:42 UTC