W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > April to June 2012

Re: Responses to GSP comments discussed in last telecon

From: Gregory Williams <greg@evilfunhouse.com>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 09:54:12 -0400
Cc: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <3771E552-6C03-4E7E-A122-2A9AB547775A@evilfunhouse.com>
To: Chimezie Ogbuji <chimezie@gmail.com>

On May 29, 2012, at 9:25 AM, Chimezie Ogbuji wrote:

> I have drafted responses to the GSP comments we discussed during the
> last teleconference.
> 
> See:
> - http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/CommentResponse:JL-3

I'm not sure about this one. You say:

"""
Secondly, it is not immediately apparent why the current approach can be considered a hardcoding approach as this critique can be applied to other specified HTTP APIs (such as the SPARQL RDF protocol's use of the ?query query string to specify the SPARQL to evaluate). Given the specific role of this protocol (the management of a graph store over HTTP) it is not immediately clear how it could come to be in conflict with other types of indirect requests.
"""

I don't think the critique can be equally applied to the Protocol's use of ?query, as the Protocol doesn't ever use the word "REST". The GSP document describes itself as being "in the REST architectural style," which is why this critique can be applied.

.greg
Received on Tuesday, 29 May 2012 13:54:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:48 GMT