W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > April to June 2011

Re: JSON Results doc : First complete draft ready

From: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 14:23:27 +0100
Cc: "Andy Seaborne" <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>, "SPARQL Working Group" <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <8F5A0A38-5426-4371-80AF-A7E76BC02341@deri.org>
To: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
Just to understand the issue about warnings/comments...

> > Are there any examples of system that do add anything to the JSON format?
> 
> Yeah, 4store apparently, it adds a "warnings": block after "results":, and puts an array of strings there: https://github.com/garlik/4store/blob/master/src/frontend/results.c#L1909
> 
> I'm not sure who did that, but it's quite a good idea!

Wouldn't that be non-conformant/problematic with the current spec?

As a work-around,  could we allow to "add more keys" on top-level, i.e. do we/could we 
(i) state somewhere that adding keys except "results","boolean" on top level is allowed 
and (ii) give "warnings:" block from 4store as an (informative) example?

Axel


On 17 May 2011, at 12:05, Steve Harris wrote:

> On 2011-05-17, at 11:40, Andy Seaborne wrote:
> 
> > Edits done.
> >
> >
> > On 17/05/11 09:26, Steve Harris wrote:
> >> A quick review:
> >>
> >> 3.1.1 "vars"
> >>
> >> The "var" member - Should be "vars" I think. A variable is not
> >> necessary ->  A variable is not necessarily
> >>
> >> 3.2.1 "bindings"
> >>
> >> Possibly worth including an example of a solution with no bindings,
> >> the text /could/ be interpreted as meaning it should be omitted.
> >> Minor point.
> >
> > Example added, text reworded.
> >
> >> In XML it's possible to include runtime warnings and errors inline in
> >> XML comments without messing up processing. It would be good if there
> >> was some way to do something similar in JSON, e.g if there was an
> >> "_comment" key (anything disjoint from variable names) which was
> >> defined to be ignored. JSON doesn't have "native" comments. Minor
> >> point.
> >
> > Tricky.
> >
> > The XML comments aren't an XML element - different processing model - and can go anywhere.
> >
> > I support there is nothing to stop an implementation adding "_comment" or "_warning" or etc if it wants to.
> >
> > We would have to define where it can go.
> >
> > We can:
> > 1/ Leave the doc as-is - maximum backwards compatibility
> > 2/ Define a key or keys and add some general text about it can go in any object.
> > 3/ Define a key or keys and add to the doc like other keys.
> >
> > I'm inclined to go for (1) [do nothing]
> >
> > Are there any examples of system that do add anything to the JSON format?
> 
> Yeah, 4store apparently, it adds a "warnings": block after "results":, and puts an array of strings there: https://github.com/garlik/4store/blob/master/src/frontend/results.c#L1909
> 
> I'm not sure who did that, but it's quite a good idea!
> 
> On the downside you can't include warnings inline, you have to save them up to the end, but it's less likely to confuse old processors.
> 
> - Steve
> 
> >> On 2011-05-12, at 11:34, Andy Seaborne wrote:
> >>
> >>> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/json-results/json-results.xml
> >>>
> >>> There is now a complete 1st draft document (and fairly unchecked).
> >>>
> >>> It addresses the comments made (Richard, Michael, Paul) by
> >>> restructuring the whole document and copying across content from
> >>> before.  I wil go back and check the comments again but by the time
> >>> the ties to the XML format are removed, it's a rather different
> >>> document.
> >>>
> >>> I have tried to strike a balance and retained a more informal style
> >>> but it should also be accurate.
> >>>
> >>> If anyone wants to have a go at JSON schema,
> >>> http://json-schema.org/ then please do - I don't plan on doing that
> >>> this time round.
> >>>
> >>> It's time for reviews.  It's not a long document.
> >>>
> >>> Andy
> >>>
> >>
> 
> --
> Steve Harris, CTO, Garlik Limited
> 1-3 Halford Road, Richmond, TW10 6AW, UK
> +44 20 8439 8203  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
> 
> 
> 
Received on Tuesday, 17 May 2011 13:23:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:46 GMT