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

Re: Some comments on the SPARQL 1.1 draft documents

From: Alexandre Passant <alexandre.passant@deri.org>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 11:55:33 +0000
Cc: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>, SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <AC28FAD6-166B-4DD6-A27C-E21F1777A2A7@deri.org>
To: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
Wrt his first comment and your reply, you may point him to the recent  
thread launched by Sandro if he has concerns on the topic.

Alex.

On 6 Nov 2009, at 11:51, Steve Harris wrote:

> Seems reasonable, but one comment: I'm not familiar with "upwards  
> compatible" as a term. Is it equivalent to backwards compatible, or  
> forwards compatible, or some other?
>
> - Steve
>
> On 6 Nov 2009, at 02:18, Axel Polleres wrote:
>
>> I have drafted a reply at:
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/CommentResponse:BL
>>
>> Please feel free to add or suggest changes to the reply, if needed.
>>
>> Axel
>>
>>
>> Begin forwarded message:
>>
>>> Resent-From: public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
>>> From: "Ben Lavender" <blavender@gmail.com>
>>> Date: 5 November 2009 13:00:56 PST
>>> To: <public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org>
>>> Subject: Some comments on the SPARQL 1.1 draft documents
>>> archived-at: <http://www.w3.org/mid/ee8ed2da0911051300i1df3d97cjcd63a69a7073095d@mail.gmail.com 
>>> >
>>>
>>> I posted some comments about the 1.1 draft on my blog, which Axel
>>> Polleres asked that I post here.  I will not paste the entire
>>> contents, as I suffer from a clinical lack of conciseness.   
>>> Instead, I
>>> will say my two main points and link.
>>>
>>> The first, smaller point was a disappointment with the choice of
>>> RDF/XML as the one standard required to be supported by the new RDF
>>> graph HTTP management API.  The protocol has issues marked as
>>> 'postponed' for years.  Other easy to parse protocols have existed  
>>> for
>>> years.  Why the continued support of RDF/XML as the canonical
>>> standard?
>>>
>>> The larger point was that the sizable syntax extensions make a
>>> protocol with limited adoption even more difficult to implement.
>>> Implementations do not exist for several popular web development
>>> languages, and enlarging the syntax only increases the range of
>>> features that are 'required' to be supported.
>>>
>>> I suggested that a better route would be to establish a more
>>> machine-friendly format as the standard, and define SPARQL in  
>>> terms of
>>> how it compiles into that.  That algebra, already published  
>>> alongside
>>> the syntax, is readably expressible as S-expressions, and those  
>>> should
>>> be the protocol, with the human-readable form as an addendum.  The  
>>> end
>>> result is that *every* language feature can easily be subject to
>>> extension, service discovery, and the incremental implementation  
>>> that
>>> small-scale open source projects need, instead of only those  
>>> features
>>> expressible by extension functions.
>>>
>>> Further, it's worth noting that SQL has spent the last 20 years  
>>> being
>>> abstracted away by necessarily complicated libraries, and having the
>>> structure of a query language be well-defined in a machine-readable
>>> format seems to be more forward-looking than the incidental  
>>> details of
>>> a human-readable version.
>>>
>>> The service discovery feature was an excellent step in the right
>>> direction, and some of us would love to see it apply to everything
>>> SPARQL can do, not just part of it.
>>>
>>> The long-winded version is at:
>>>
>>> http://bhuga.net/2009/11/w3c-going-wrong-direction-sparql-11
>>>
>>> Ben Lavender
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> -- 
> Steve Harris, CTO, Garlik Limited
> 2 Sheen Road, Richmond, TW9 1AE, UK
> +44(0)20 8973 2465  http://www.garlik.com/
> Registered in England and Wales 535 7233 VAT # 849 0517 11
> Registered office: Thames House, Portsmouth Road, Esher, Surrey,  
> KT10 9AD
>

--
Dr. Alexandre Passant
Digital Enterprise Research Institute
National University of Ireland, Galway
:me owl:sameAs <http://apassant.net/alex> .
Received on Friday, 6 November 2009 11:56:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:40 GMT