W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org > October 2010

Re: SPARQL 1.1 Protocol: Format of fault messages

From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2010 17:20:49 +0100
Cc: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>, public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <903DE8E2-9D99-4F6E-B9A5-250C1BED4A2F@garlik.com>
To: Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>
On 2010-10-03, at 17:03, Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote:
...
>> And RDFa would be better than a magic class name.
> 
> I'm afraid of demanding a generic RDFa parser for consumers of error
> messages. (Of course, I'm happy to see that practice flourish on its
> own.) Class was a poor choice, how about ID? New proposal:
> 
> [[
> A malformedQueryFault response SHOULD be an XHTML document in which an
> element with an XML ID of <code>malformedQueryFault</code> conveys a
> human-readable representation of the error. For example:
> 
>  <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
>  <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0//EN" "http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/DTD/xhtml.dtd">
>  <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
>    <head>
>      <title>Malformed Query</title>
>    </head>
>    <body>
>      <h1>Malformed Query</h1>
>      <pre id="malformedQueryFault">Parse error at [5:17], unexpected ' '</pre>
>    </body>
>  </html>
> 
> Other HTML elements in the response do not change the interpretation
> of the element with the XML ID of <code>malformedQueryFault</code>/
> ]]

I agree with Richard that this is an issue, and I'd like to see something like the proposal above.

- Steve

-- 
Steve Harris, CTO, Garlik Limited
1-3 Halford Road, Richmond, TW10 6AW, UK
+44 20 8439 8203  http://www.garlik.com/
Registered in England and Wales 535 7233 VAT # 849 0517 11
Registered office: Thames House, Portsmouth Road, Esher, Surrey, KT10 9AD
Received on Sunday, 3 October 2010 16:21:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 3 October 2010 16:21:26 GMT