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

Re: ACTION-4: Review SPARQL Graph Store Protocol and suggest how we should move forward with it

From: Steve K Speicher <sspeiche@us.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2012 08:15:08 -0400
To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
Cc: public-ldp-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF5DFBAB5A.A615A3C0-ON85257A7F.0042F859-85257A7F.0043513B@us.ibm.com>
> From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
> To: public-ldp-wg@w3.org, 
> Date: 09/19/2012 05:51 PM
> Subject: Re: ACTION-4: Review SPARQL Graph Store Protocol and suggest 
how 
> we should move  forward with it
> 
..snip..
> 
> LDBP is unsuitable for data management - it forbids general RDF data, 
> for example. (4.1.9 - "BPR representations MUST use only the following 
> standard datatypes"; 4.4.5 is also problematic where it hints at 
> changing the predicates it does understand; 4.1.4 is at odds with IRI 
> resolution; other requirements are problematic in intent and approach).
> 
> If LDBP for BPRs removes the restrictions on simple "upload-download" to 

> result in the same data then it might be able to use GSP(direct), and in 

> fact it would just be RFC2616.
> 
> LDBP for BPCs is not relevant for graph stores.  Graph stores do not 
> have such a container model.
> 
> Alternative:
> 
> Why not make LDBP for BPRs be simply a link to RFC 2616? + discussion 
> that text/turtle be provided.  Then a plain HTTP server can be used to 
> provide LDBP for BPRs (not BPCs).
 
I confess, I am not following what you are proposing here.

..snip..
> One final comment - I see nowhere in the submission that precludes a 
> single graph, which has all the resources and containers in it.  A graph 

> store - multiple graphs, flat structure - is not necessary.  Do you want 

> to constraint

I think you got chopped off here.

Thanks,
Steve Speicher
IBM Rational Software
OSLC - Lifecycle integration inspired by the web -> 
http://open-services.net
Received on Thursday, 20 September 2012 12:15:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 9 May 2013 13:44:23 UTC