Re: allow implicitly unbound variables in SPARQL results?

On 16:54, Wed 26 Oct 05, Jeen Broekstra wrote:

> FWIW I do not think the current design to make *excessive* use of 
> bandwidth, except in corner cases. YMMV.

Well, FWIW, that corner case is the commentor's *common* case; that is, the
primary of SPARQL and the results format involves (necessarily) lots and
lots and lots of unbounds, because the queries involve OPTIONALs and UNIONS
(however they're spelled, I can't recall).

That's precisely the problem that led to the unusual step of thinking we
could save some bytes and still have an easily human readable format,
keeping it in XML.

I don't believe the change to <binding/> makes processing that much more
difficult. 

> If, for purposes of minimizing the result set size in bytes, we offer 
> a binary format with the reduction in size and processing time 
> mentioned above, I think that would address his concern, although of 
> course such a format is can not be processed with XSLT. The other 
> option of using GZIP compression is still a viable alternative as 
> well, IMHO.

I am only guessing here, and Bijan mentioned that Ron will be doing some
further tests, but I'd be really surprised if our organization got behind a
binary format. But, again, that's just a guess, not a position.

Cheers, 
Kendall
--
Sad songs and waltzes aren't selling this year... --Cake