W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > January to March 2005

Re: sparql-protocol.wsdl updated

From: Kendall Clark <kendall@monkeyfist.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 10:21:24 -0500
To: "Seaborne, Andy" <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
Cc: DAWG Mailing List <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20050329152124.GA27556@monkeyfist.com>

On Tue, Mar 29, 2005 at 11:10:58AM +0100, Seaborne, Andy wrote:

> It isn't a simple matter of implement-if-you-want.

I don't agree. But no matter.

> How about splitting the WSDL into two separate documents, one which is 
> purely query and service discovery and one which contains update.

I've been v. careful to distinguish between update in the *hard* sense
and "creating/destroying remote resources". I wish we could agree to
at least that, so that "update" isn't a brush to tar things with.

  Then  
> other update approaches are compared along side update and not 
> query+service description+update.

That can and should happen whether or not they are in separate WSDL
files. I really don't see the utility of two WSDLs. But I don't really
care that much, either, so if there's general support for doing that,
I'll do it.

But as I've said a few times, if there isn't consensus about doing
graph deletion and creation, I'll remove those
interfaces. Implementers can always add them back and clients may
choose to invoke those operations, of course.

Kendall Clark
Received on Tuesday, 29 March 2005 14:21:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:22 GMT