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

service description vocabulary

From: Gregory Williams <greg@evilfunhouse.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 22:41:32 -0400
Message-Id: <8F57CF25-3EB4-4065-B2F8-3F08C91ABFF1@evilfunhouse.com>
To: "public-rdf-dawg@w3.org Group" <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Beyond what's currently listed in the vocab section of the service  
description page[1], I think we need a way to describe the dataset  
provided by the endpoint. This goes beyond what things like voiD  
provide which is a way to describe a single graph. Therefore, I'd like  
to suggest something like this:

<endpoint> sd:datasetDescription [
	sd:defaultGraph <void-dataset-for-default-graph> ;
	sd:namedGraph [
		sd:graphName <graph-name> ;
		sd:graphDescription <void-dataset-for-named-graph> ;
	] .
] .

The lack of naming symmetry between sd:defaultGraph (for default  
graphs) and sd:graphDescription (for named graphs) could probably be  
made better (maybe sd:defaultGraphDescription?), but this modeling  
allows each graph in the dataset to be described as well as things to  
be said about the entire dataset.

Additionally, I was hoping to get feedback on whether people think the  
vocab should distinguish between language extensions and supported  
features? Is this a meaningful distinction? For example, an extension  
that modifies the SPARQL syntax (e.g. to support the BINDINGS keyword)  
versus a feature describing the algorithm used to generate DESCRIBE  
results. The former clearly extends SPARQL, but the latter works  
within the existing constraints of SPARQL. Thoughts?

thanks,
.greg

[1] http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:ServiceDescriptions
Received on Friday, 25 September 2009 02:42:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:08:28 GMT