W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > April to June 2009

RE: Some comments on F&R (2)

From: Seaborne, Andy <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 10:57:47 +0000
To: "public-rdf-dawg@w3.org" <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <B6CF1054FDC8B845BF93A6645D19BEA3646C65D359@GVW1118EXC.americas.hpqcorp.net>


> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-rdf-dawg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-rdf-dawg-request@w3.org] On
> Behalf Of Kjetil Kjernsmo
> Sent: 10 June 2009 11:29
> To: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Some comments on F&R (2)
> 
> On Wednesday 10 June 2009 11:46:09 Seaborne, Andy wrote:
> > I prefer putting protocol under update to be clear it is in support of
> > update.  "Enhancement" suggests tweaks to the query protocol to me but we
> > wish to leave the design space open and avoid prejudging naming issues.
> > Also, the new protocol is there to support update so make that explicit.
> 
> I'll just quickly respond to this as it is the only point where I disagree,
> and let others chime in to discuss the rest:
> 
> I'm not thinking about the protocol just in terms of update, I'm thinking
> about it as a successor to http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-protocol/

> Thus, HTTP graph update is just a part of it, there 
> issues going into the SPARQL Protocol. Perhaps not much more, though.
> Nevertheless I feel that's reason enough to keep them separate.

The top-level features are "update" and "service description".   The WG FeatureProposal list does not say "protocol". The charter says that backwards compatibility of the query language is of very high importance. I think backwards compatibility of the query protocol is as well.

It would not precluded protocol/service description but it's a very big "maybe" to start now that service description will cover protocol.  What I took from the discussion is that there may be some minor changes (backwards compatible!) to the query protocol in support of service description but equally there are other designs to consider that are not protocol changes (e.g. a SPARQL query) at all.

Talking about "the protocol" does not work for me anyway.  We had SPARQL/Query, SPARQL/Protocol - now we have  SPARQL/UpdateLanguage and SPARQL/UpdateProtocol.

	Andy


> 
> Kind regards
> 
> Kjetil Kjernsmo
> --
> Senior Knowledge Engineer / SPARQL F&R Editor
> Mobile: +47 986 48 234
> Email: kjetil.kjernsmo@computas.com
> Web: http://www.computas.com/

> 
> |  SHARE YOUR KNOWLEDGE  |
> 
> Computas AS  PO Box 482, N-1327 Lysaker | Phone:+47 6783 1000 | Fax:+47 6783
> 1001
> 

Received on Wednesday, 10 June 2009 10:59:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:39 GMT