- From: Leigh Dodds <leigh@ldodds.com>
- Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 12:00:25 +0100
- To: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
- Cc: Hugh Glaser <hg@ecs.soton.ac.uk>, Barry Norton <barry.norton@ontotext.com>, Luca Matteis <lmatteis@gmail.com>, "public-lod@w3.org> <public-lod@w3.org" <public-lod@w3.org>
Hi Paul, On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 11:54 AM, Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl> wrote: > Hi Leigh > > The problem is that it's really easy to write sparql queries that are > inefficient when you don't know the data [1] and even when you do the > flexibility of sparql means that people can easily end-up writing complex > hard to process queries. Totally agree with your assessment, I was just observing that there's a number of factors in play which result in a design trade-off meaning there is no right answer or winning solution. My experience is much the same as yours. Which is why I've been experimenting with APIs over SPARQL and worked with Jeni and Dave on the design of the Linked Data API. I think its pretty good, but don't think we've done a good job yet of documenting it. I also suspect there's an even simpler subset or profile in there, but I've not had the time yet to dig through and see what kinds of APIs people are building with it. L. -- Leigh Dodds Freelance Technologist Open Data, Linked Data Geek t: @ldodds w: ldodds.com e: leigh@ldodds.com
Received on Thursday, 18 April 2013 11:00:52 UTC