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

Re: ACTION-550: my SPARQL1.1 Service Description review

From: Gregory Williams <greg@evilfunhouse.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 23:50:41 -0500
Cc: "SPARQL Working Group" <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <EEDE9B72-D080-4C98-98D3-A6EC7C12D88D@evilfunhouse.com>
To: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
On Dec 6, 2011, at 10:38 PM, Gregory Williams wrote:

>>> This goes beyond what can be expressed explicitly in the SD vocab, but this assumption would be grounded by a sd:supportedLanguage triple (indicating that all of the functions defined for either 1.0 or 1.1 are supported).
>> 
>> Yes, I agree, incomplete support should be advertised by sd:supportedLanguage (not sure whether we want to mention that explicitly).
> 
> Hmmm… I meant that *complete* support should be advertised with sd:supportedLanguage. The text for sd:Language indicates that it describes "SPARQL languages, including specific configurations providing particular features or extensions." So I'm not sure it would be appropriate to describe an incomplete implementation.

After writing this, I notice that the text for sd:supportedLanguage (as opposed to the text for sd:Language) talks about "a SPARQL language subset". I think that's wrong given the text in sd:Language, and have removed "subset" from the text:

"""
Relates an instance of sd:Service to a SPARQL language (e.g. Query and Update) that it implements.
"""

.greg
Received on Wednesday, 7 December 2011 04:51:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:47 GMT