W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > January to March 2010

Re: draft response to Nicholas J Humfrey

From: Gregory Williams <greg@evilfunhouse.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2010 15:14:34 -0400
Message-Id: <0162AF78-1595-4392-9420-30145E473265@evilfunhouse.com>
To: SPARQL Working Group WG <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On Mar 5, 2010, at 6:03 PM, Gregory Williams wrote:

> OK. I don't think I've heard anyone objecting to this, and it seems relatively simple to add to the vocab. Unless anyone speaks up against the idea, I'll try to draft some changes to add it to the vocab and SD document and update the response text to Nicholas.

I've updated the response to Nicholas J Humfrey regarding the support for enumerating supported result formats in a service description:

http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/CommentResponse:NH-1

I've also updated the draft of the service description document to list a sd:resultFormat:

http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/service-description-1.1/xmlspec.xml

The property would be used like this:

<service> sd:resultFormat <http://www.w3.org/2008/turtle#turtle> .

My gut instinct here is to support *just* the sd:resultFormat predicate, but not the system of identifying the result format as was done in the original SADDLE vocabulary[1] (by having terms for the spec's document URI and/or the media type of the serialization format). There are already properties to do some of that (e.g. foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf), and I'd just as soon not reinvent the wheel. However, it would be nice to have explicit URIs for the common formats that people are going to use.

Currently, none of the standard serialization formats (RDF/XML, SPARQL/XML) have identifying URIs that can be used in this fashion. Of some of the commonly used formats that aren't proper standards, Turtle has a URI (as used above), but SPARQL/JSON doesn't.

I'm not sure if it's possible to update the existing docs to add identifying URIs, but that would certainly be nice to have if we're trying to reference the serialization formats in the service description. The SPARQL result formats (XML and JSON) would seem to be easier for us to update than RDF/XML, but I'm not sure what the process might be for that (especially since we're not currently updating any of these documents).

Sandro, Ivan, is this something we could look into (what it would take to update any/all of these documents to add identifying URIs)?

thanks,
.greg

[1] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/proto-wd/saddle.html
Received on Saturday, 20 March 2010 19:15:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:41 GMT