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

Re: [OK?] Re: SPARQL: Error handling

From: Kendall Clark <kendall@monkeyfist.com>
Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 18:12:52 -0500
Message-Id: <8BA3DE68-9648-4296-A910-12774DDF072F@monkeyfist.com>
Cc: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>, Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>, public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>


On Jan 29, 2006, at 2:51 PM, Dan Connolly wrote:

> [[
> When a SPARQL query string is not a legal sequence of characters in  
> the
> language defined by the SPARQL grammar, this fault message should be
> returned. An HTTP 2xx status code must not be returned.
> ]]
>  -- http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-protocol/
>
>
> Hmm... perhaps the mention of HTTP 2xx is a bit of the HTTP concrete
> binding slipping in where we should be speaking of the abstract
> protocol.
>
> Kendall, how about making that
>
>   ... a query Out Message message must not be returned.

The spec already says that; it says clearly that our fault  
propagation model is Fault Replaces Message. So if we say "must  
return MalformedQuery" then that means that "Out Message must not be  
returned".

One change I'd make is something like, s/"An HTTP 2xx status code  
must not be returned."/"In the case of HTTP bindings, an HTTP 2xx  
status code must not be returned."/

Is there any reason to state the fault propagation rule redundantly?

At any rate, in 1.108 I've updated this section in response to this  
discussion.

Cheers,
Kendall
--
You're part of the human race
All of the stars and the outer space
Part of the system again
Received on Sunday, 29 January 2006 23:13:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:14:50 GMT