W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org > February 2011

Fwd: Further Comment on SPARQL 1.1 Service Description

From: Rob Vesse <rav08r@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2011 12:44:10 +0000
To: <public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org>
Message-ID: <EMEW3|b73e5887b0a1d83fb3e87d42b218401fn1ACiF06rav08r|ecs.soton.ac.uk|8d8d18b33d0c5ce61c5d8f6de864b3df@ecs.soton.ac.uk>


Hi 

I just noticed this part of the specification in Section 5 on
Conformance: 

The returned RDF content MUST contain one and only one
triple of the form:

  rdf:type sd:Service . 

This seems to be a somewhat
heavy handed thing to mandate IMO. 

If I want to have a system that
provides multiple endpoints for Update/Query etc why can't I define all the
services of that system in a single service description? This allows me to
both have a dedicated URI in my system for returning the service
description in addition to returning it when an appropriate GET/OPTIONS
request is received at the various service URIs 

This seems to
unnecessarily make service discovery (which surely is part of the point of
having service descriptions) harder than it needs to be. 

Provided each
service has a different  consuming clients can easily find the services
they actually want even if multiple services are defined in the description
so why mandate only 1 instance of sd:Service per Service Description
document? 

Regards, 

Rob Vesse  
-- 
PhD Student
IAM Group
Bay 20, Room
4027, Building 32
Electronics & Computer Science
University of Southampton
Received on Friday, 11 February 2011 12:44:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 11 February 2011 12:44:46 GMT