W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org > January 2006

[OK?] Re: Minor editorial issues for WD-rdf-sparql-protocol-20050914

From: Kendall Clark <kendall@monkeyfist.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 12:27:48 -0500
Message-Id: <DE091E56-354E-4F0F-8EC3-3C71F594E090@monkeyfist.com>
Cc: public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
To: reto.krummenacher@uibk.ac.at


On Dec 12, 2005, at 11:55 AM, Reto Krummenacher wrote:

Hi Reto,

>
> The only observable difference in my opinion is the use of john and
> susan instead of alice and bob in example 2.2.1.8.

Yes, that's the only difference in the *query*.

But there is a big difference in the two requests (or "protocol  
operations", if you prefer):

in 2.2.1.7 the RDF Dataset is specified solely in the query itself  
(using the FROM and FROM NAMED bits); while in 2.2.1.8 there is an  
RDF Dataset specified in the query as well as an RDF Dataset  
specified in the HTTP bits, aka, in the protocol...

They do not specify the same RDF Dataset, and according to the  
Protocol spec (section called Resolving Ambiguous RDF Datasets) the  
dataset specified by the protocol is the one the query processor must  
use.

Are you satisfied with this response? I have also tweaked the  
introductory text in 2.2.1.8 in order to make the difference more  
readily apparent.

Thanks for yr comments!

Cheers,
Kendall
Received on Thursday, 12 January 2006 17:27:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:14:49 GMT