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

Re: SPARQL 1.1 Protocol Conformance

From: Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>
Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2011 09:09:28 -0400
Message-ID: <4E37F708.3070008@thefigtrees.net>
To: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
CC: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On 8/2/2011 4:35 AM, Steve Harris wrote:
> I think it's probably harmless in the grand scheme of things.

OK, if this is consensus then that's good enough for me.

> Other than direct POSTing (which some toolkits may have trouble
> with?) it's not that tricky to support, even to just return a "method
> not implemented" error.

Yeah, I'm mainly concerned that clients start POSTing directly, and that 
that's not widely implemented...

Lee

> - Steve
>
> On 2011-08-02, at 03:08, Lee Feigenbaum wrote:
>
>> In SPARQL 1.0, conformance to the SPARQL Protocol required that an
>> implementation implement the abstract query interface, and that if
>> the implementation implemented the HTTP or SOAP bindings to that
>> interface, that that be done in the manner specified in the
>> document. (See
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-protocol/#conformance)
>>
>> In the SPARQL 1.1 Protocol, we have these changes:
>>
>> * Added an update operation * Removed an abstract definition of the
>> operation * Removed SOAP bindings * Added the ability to directly
>> POST a query or update, in addition to via HTTP GET&  POST
>>
>> So what should conformance be?
>>
>> Suggestion:
>>
>> * Implement either the query or the update operation or both * For
>> any implemented operations, implement it in at least one of the
>> ways normatively defined in the document
>>
>> This feels to me to be in the spirit of the SPARQL 1.0 Protocol...
>> that said, I'm not thrilled with it since this is a protocol and
>> this gives you 5 different things you can implement to be a
>> conformant SPARQL 1.1 Protocol implementation -- that doesn't seem
>> great to be for interoperability.
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>> Lee
>>
>
Received on Tuesday, 2 August 2011 13:10:12 GMT

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