W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > January to March 2006

Re: re-opening the DESCRIBE issue

From: Seaborne, Andy <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 16:29:19 +0100
Message-ID: <442BF94F.4000302@hp.com>
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
CC: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>

Dan Connolly wrote:
> In reviewing our request for CR,
>   http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/crq349
> there was a lot of concern about interoperability
> around DESCRIBE. TimBL took a close look at CBD
> and MSG from
> http://semanticweb.deit.univpm.it/submissions/www2005/WWW2005_signignRDF.pdf
> and looked briefly at GK's recent proposal
>  http://www.w3.org/mid/4427D376.9070504@ninebynine.org
> and concluded that this issue merits considerable further work.
> We talked about the possibility of postponing the issue
> and marking the DESCRIBE syntax "reserved for future use"
> and he was supportive of that.
> The issue is hereby re-opened.
> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/issues#DESCRIBE
> I look forward to proposals to close/postpone it. I gather Andy is
> available to discuss them only thru this Friday.
> There's still a reasonably good chance that we can get
> a SPARQL CR out next week, if we come to consensus on
> something quickly.

I'm happy with postponing it, either moving it to an appendix or a separate, 
linked document.

Either way, it could also link to a more discursive WG Note that surveys the 
current options.  (There's material out there already so it might be 
sufficient to just link to it after reviewing it - and then there's service 
description or different service endpoints.)

I would like to see the keyword reserved and the current syntax maintained as 
it is already out there.  I'm neutral as to adding the extra argument as an 
optional part or the syntax.  ARQ would support it if it were added.

[[Graham's proposal only captures the "set of known algorithms" usage, not the 
case where what is returned is influenced by the data itself (e.g. find a 
resource of type book, so return the ISBN number).  But my feeling is that the 
"set of known algorithms" is a common usage.]]

Received on Thursday, 30 March 2006 15:29:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:00:50 UTC