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

RE: ACTION-480 completed: Review CSV document

From: Polleres, Axel <axel.polleres@deri.org>
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2011 13:16:57 +0100
Message-ID: <316ADBDBFE4F4D4AA4FEEF7496ECAEF903E8C578@EVS1.ac.nuigalway.ie>
To: "Andy Seaborne" <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>, <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
> Are you proposing that the format does cover ASK results?  Or listing
> the changes that would be needed without advocacy?

It seemed very little of a change, so <chair-hat off> I was in favor of covering ASK as well </chair-hat off>, but...
 
> >       "true" or "false" followed by the end-of-line character. The following
> >       sections explain how to encode the results table for a SELECT query in CSV
> >       (Section 4) and TSV (Section 5).
> 
>  Steve and Greg have argued for requiring the header line in CSV files.
>  The TSV format requires a header line.

... I see, the problem is that ASK wouldn't have a header line?
It seems we need a group decision on this?
 
 
> > 6) in section 4.2
> >
> >     Why do we reference [RDF-SPARQL-QUERY] here instead of [SPARQL11-QUERY]?
>
> References are managed by the general W3C mechanisms and you can't ref
> working drafts.  Has to be fixed later :-(

Note sure whether you mean that's a process or a technical problem? (There's no problem in referenceing from one WD to another WD, right? we do that in several docs) . At least, if we mean to refer to query11 eventually, let's add a @@ not to forget?
 
> Can we please publish this as a WD-NOTE now?

Lee said he wanted to have a look before we publish... http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2011-07-05#line0170
Lee?
 
Axel

 

 

 
-- 
Dr. Axel Polleres
axel.polleres@deri.org    http://www.polleres.net/

________________________________

From: public-rdf-dawg-request@w3.org on behalf of Andy Seaborne
Sent: Tue 7/12/2011 11:43
To: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
Subject: Re: ACTION-480 completed: Review CSV document





On 11/07/11 15:55, Polleres, Axel wrote:
> Here goes my review of the CVS doc.
>
>
> 1) In the abstract:
>
> "@@Add ASK as well? One line - true or false"
>
> I suggest to:
>
>   a) s/This document describes their use for expressing SPARQL query results from SELECT queries./
>        This document describes their use for expressing SPARQL query results from SELECT and ASK queries./
>
>   b) Add a new very short section before Section 3 as new Section 3 as follows:

Are you proposing that the format does cover ASK results?  Or listing
the changes that would be needed without advocacy?

>       3 Encoding results of ASK Queries as CSV/TSV
>
>       The result of ASK queries as a CSV or TSV is either the single string
>       "true" or "false" followed by the end-of-line character. The following
>       sections explain how to encode the results table for a SELECT query in CSV
>       (Section 4) and TSV (Section 5).

Steve and Greg have argued for requiring the header line in CSV files.
The TSV format requires a header line.

An ASK query of one word isn't compliant with th

>
>
>     and renaming current Section 3 and 4 to
>
>       4 Encoding results tables as CSV - Comma Separated values
>
>       5 Encoding results tables as TSV - Tab Separated values
>
>
>   c) A small side remark, I found a small problem in the "SPARQL Query Results XML Format" doc (http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-XMLres/)...

Is there an errata?

Please add:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010OctDec/0215.html

> 2) In section 3.1:
>
> s/The SPARQL CSV Results Format should use of a header row./
>    The SPARQL CSV Results Format should use a header row./

Fixed.

> BTW, should we add an explicit remark, under which circumstances it might make sense to ommit the header row? E.g.:
> "Note that, in general, i.e. when more than one output variable appear in the SELECT clause, removing the
> header row will result in ambiguous order of columns in the result table. However, for instance when only a single output
> variable is selected it may be desirable to omit the header row."

See above.

> 3) in Section 3.2
>
> "Fields do not need to be quoted if they do not contain"
>
> Do I read this correctly that quoted and unquoted can be mixed arbitrarily, i.e.
>
> x
> foo
> bar
>
> x
> "foo"
> "bar"
>
> x
> "foo"
> bar
>
> are all valid serializations of the same result set ?x/"foo", ?x/"bar", yes?

Yes.

Standard CSV.

>
> 4) in section 3.3:
>
>   It would be nice, if the final example for CSV would also contain some quoted strings.

Note it already says:
@@More complete example

>
> 5) in section 4:
>
>   Is there a particular rationale for disallowing triple quoted forms from Turtle, and if so, can this rationale be added?

A raw newline or raw tab would break the TSV format. By insisting on
single quoted forms only, that can't happen.

I've added something although generally I do not hold with explaining
every design decision in a spec.  A spec is a definition; justification
leads to excessive text and can't not be complete.

>
> 6) in section 4.2
>
>     Why do we reference [RDF-SPARQL-QUERY] here instead of [SPARQL11-QUERY]?

References are managed by the general W3C mechanisms and you can't ref
working drafts.  Has to be fixed later :-(

>
> 7) in section 4.2
>
>      s/Use of the samelabel indicates the same blank node within the results but has no significance outside the results./
>       Use of the same label indicates the same blank node within the results but has no significance outside the results./

Done.

>
> 8)
>
> It would be nice, if the final example for TSV would also contain some \t, \n, or \r

Note it already says:
@@More complete example

Providing those examples would be very helpful!

-----

Can we please publish this as a WD-NOTE now?

        Andy
Received on Tuesday, 12 July 2011 12:17:26 GMT

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