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

Re: allow implicitly unbound variables in SPARQL results?

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 11:26:35 -0400
Message-Id: <09c778df557aa703339a8572c771295a@isr.umd.edu>
Cc: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, Jeen Broekstra <jeen@aduna.biz>, RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
To: kendall@monkeyfist.com

On Oct 26, 2005, at 11:16 AM, Kendall Clark wrote:

> On 16:54, Wed 26 Oct 05, Jeen Broekstra wrote:
[snip]
>> 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.

I think, in general, between beefy clients and servers, gzip is going 
to turn out to be "ok". For the specific case of mobile phones, yes, I 
could see a special alternative format, but that requires careful 
analysis of the actual effect on real hardware.

It would still be interesting to see Jeen's binary format, esp in 
comparison to "standard" binary XML things. But I tend to agree with 
Kendall about being surprised. It'd be good to get some feedback from 
mobile and  pervasive folks.

Cheers,
Bijan.
Received on Wednesday, 26 October 2005 15:26:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:24 GMT