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

Re: comment: SPARQL Protocol: inconsistent parameter names [Was: agenda: RDF Data Access 30Aug]

From: Kendall Clark <kendall@monkeyfist.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 13:40:54 -0400
To: "Seaborne, Andy" <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
Cc: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20050829174054.GF4806@monkeyfist.com>

On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 06:31:28PM +0100, Seaborne, Andy wrote:

> Would it be possible to do it the other way round?

Yes, of course. I considered doing it this way around, precisely for the
reasons you suggest:

> There are deployed HTTP based examples services (mine, Dave's, cwm's SPARQL 
> server) and there are already embedded links using the "query=" form e.g. 
> on http://esw.w3.org/topic/DawgShows

But I was gonna go with sparql-query because it's more specific, and "query"
could be used in a future version of the protocol for RDF query languages
other than SPARQL. I think that's worth the change over, since
"sparql-query" does work, for both, today, though with the cost you suggest.

So it's certain, but small incompatible change today versus probable, but
larger incompatible change in the future. I'm not hugely committed either
way, but I will note that folks deploying to an unfinished standard should
be prepared for gratuitous-seeming changes... :>

I'm happy leaving the change to a straw poll during tomorrow's call.

Received on Monday, 29 August 2005 17:41:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:00:48 UTC