W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org > June 2012

RE: HTTP status codes when no result is responded

From: Markus Luczak-Rösch <markus.luczak-roesch@fu-berlin.de>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 09:09:06 +0200
To: "'Lee Feigenbaum'" <lee@thefigtrees.net>
Cc: <public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org>
Message-ID: <000901cd4eb3$94f37c70$beda7550$@luczak-roesch@fu-berlin.de>
Hi Lee.

Thank you very much for taking my concern into account and commenting on it.

I think the way how the SPARQL 1.1 protocol now elaborates on the use of
HTTP status codes is an advancement compared to the initial SPARQL protocol
and I am very happy with this. It leaves it to the endpoint developer which
status code to response and how to indicate empty result sets which was a
procedure in favor of most of the people on the LOD list as well if I
remember correctly.

Great work. Thank you very much for your efforts.

Best regards from Berlin,
Markus

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lee Feigenbaum [mailto:figtree@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Lee
> Feigenbaum
> Sent: Dienstag, 19. Juni 2012 19:11
> To: Markus Luczak-Rösch
> Cc: public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
> Subject: Re: HTTP status codes when no result is responded
> 
> Hi Markus,
> 
> My sincere apologies for how long it has taken us to respond to your
> comment.
> 
> The Working Group discussed various approaches to specifying HTTP
> status codes in both success and failure cases for the SPARQL. Given
> the variety of usage scenarios considered and the fact that the SPARQL
> 1.1 Protocol is specifically built on HTTP, the group decided to allow
> SPARQL Protocol endpoints to use any appropriate HTTP status code, as
> long as the codes used are consistent with the HTTP standard. The
> specification text in question is:
> 
> * http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-protocol/#query-success
> * http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-protocol/#query-failure
> * http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-protocol/#update-success
> * http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-protocol/#update-failure
> 
> We would kindly ask you to acknowledge that you are happy with this
> response, Lee On behalf of the SPARQL WG
> 
> On 4/1/2011 4:44 AM, Markus Luczak-Rösch wrote:
> > Hi all!
> >
> > I recently sent a message to the public-LOD group where I got the
> > pointer to better place this here directly. I quickly went through
> the
> > draft at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/protocol-1.1/ and found
> > nothing about the usage of HTTP status code 204, so I repeat my
> observation here:
> >
> > Since on the LDOW11 and USEWOD workshops at WWW there was the recent
> > discussion about using HTTP referrers properly when browsing,
> crawling
> > etc. linked data (short using it) I would like to add another thing
> > that I was wondering about. If endpoints deliver no content to the
> > client e.g. if the client performs a SPARQL query that yields no
> > results, servers answer HTTP status code 200 and deliver some content
> > that holds the information that there were no results. As far as I
> > see, there is the HTTP status code
> > 204 for exactly this, isn't it? (see
> > http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec10.html)
> >
> > So, beside the aforementioned and recently discussed proper usage of
> > referrers, I would also suggest to use the 204 HTTP status code.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Markus
> >
> >
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> > Markus Luczak-Rösch (Dipl.-Inform.)| Freie Universität Berlin
> > Lecturer/Grad. Research Associate  | Dept. of Computer Science
> > Networked Information Systems WG   | Königin-Luise-Str. 24/26
> >                                     | D-14195 Berlin
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> > www.ag-nbi.de                      | Phone: +49 30 838 75226
> > www.markus-luczak.de               | luczak@inf.fu-berlin.de
> > http://twitter.com/MLuczak         | Skype: markus_luczak
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
Received on Wednesday, 20 June 2012 07:09:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 20 June 2012 07:09:36 GMT