W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ldp-wg@w3.org > December 2012

Re: Closing ISSUE-5: Add a section explaining how LDBP is related to Graph Store Protocol

From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2012 13:48:01 +0000
Message-ID: <50C88B11.4020602@epimorphics.com>
To: public-ldp-wg@w3.org


On 11/12/12 20:04, Wilde, Erik wrote:


> LDP is all about providing an RDF view into collections of things that can
> be managed in any way, not just in a SPARQL store. in my understanding GSP
> is all about providing an RDF view into any kind of RDF. to me, these are
> very different things, but i do know that we have these recurring
> discussions with people wanting to "tunnel SPARQL" into the LDP service.
> we're actively trying to avoid this, because one goal we have is to allow
> LDP to be implemented on any platform. we want to be friendly to
> RDF-centric clients, while still allowing people to manage their LDP
> service on top of an SQL or XML database back-end. it's hard to imagine
> how we could "align" GSP and LDP without changing at least one of the two
> pretty very substantially.

This seem mixed up.

1/ GSP does not involve SPARQL queries; it only involves HTTP.
2/ Who is trying to "tunnel SPARQL"?  (I'm not)
3/ LDP is RDF - surely all clients are "RDF-centric"?
4/ "on top of an SQL or XML database back-end" is an implementation 
issue, not to do with external service.  I'm imaging a filesystem 
implementation.

I think LDP ought to stay well clear of the indirect naming in GSP - it 
just isn't relevant.

	Andy
Received on Wednesday, 12 December 2012 13:48:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 9 May 2013 13:44:26 UTC