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

Re: SPARQL contracts?

From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 09:04:21 +0100
Message-ID: <4FFBE205.9070808@epimorphics.com>
To: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
The "SPARQL 1.1 Service Description"


vocabulary would meet part of this by describing the endpoint 
requirements.  There are ways to describe the data, such as VoiD.


On 10/07/12 04:54, Arthur Keen wrote:
> Disclaimer: I am not asking this question for SPARQL 1.1
> specification
> When one encounters a query in the wild, it is often difficult to
> reverse engineer the situation or conditions it was intended for. For
> example, what entailment regime it needed.    I have been wondering
> whether the idea of a SPARQL query "contract" has ever come up during
> the W3C SPARQL 1.0 or 1.1 specification process.    By "contract" I
> mean conditions that specify requirements that need to be met by the
> environment in which the query is to be executed.  For example, the
> entailment regime required by the query  or  the set of one or more
> graphs that are required by the query (e.g., FOAF or DC) to be
> present when it is executed, etc.   Does this make sense?  Was it
> ever discussed?
> Best regards Arthur
Received on Tuesday, 10 July 2012 08:04:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:01:07 UTC