W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org > April 2005

Re: Comments on SPARQL 17-Feb-2005 draft (SOURCE, Multiple-graph queries)

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 14:06:01 -0500
To: public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org, Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>
Message-Id: <1112987161.15813.16.camel@localhost>

> 1. Multiple-graph queries 
> 
> I think these should be removed from the basic SPARQL core, since I feel 
> they add a fair deal of implementation complexity and an application can 
> achieve the same result by submitting multiple queries, possibly to 
> different query processors.
>
> I also feel it would be premature to standardize an approach to multi-graph 
> querying ahead of there being a consensus/standard for something like RDF 
> named graphs.

I think the WG has considered this argument under our SOURCE issue.
  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/issues#SOURCE

While some argued, as you do, that it's premature to standardize,
use cases such as

 2.11 Finding Out New Things About People (Social Network Analysis)
 http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-dawg-uc/#u2.11

motivated this design. More explicitly, it motivated a design objective...

 4.2 Data Integration and Aggregation
 http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-dawg-uc/#d4.2

which, by the way, was accepted without consensus, i.e. over an
objection. So that will have to get reviewed when we request CR/PR.
Though I don't see sufficient new information to re-open this issue in
the WG, I have noted your comment under the SOURCE issue so that it
will be part of that review.

Feel free to add any further arguments that perhaps the WG
has not considered, and please stay tuned for our last call
documents; I hope by then we will have achieved a greater
level of consensus.

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Friday, 8 April 2005 19:06:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:14:48 GMT