- From: Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>
- Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 09:28:54 +0000
- To: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>
- CC: AWWSW TF <public-awwsw@w3.org>
> My other recent idea: > > We are suggesting that some response messages can be translated into > RDF. In the same way we should be able to say that a request message > (such as a GET) can be translated into SPARQL, or something very close > to it. Good idea! Please note that we have recently discussed this in: 'RESTful SPARQL? You Name It! Aligning SPARQL with REST and Resource Orientation' [1] Cheers, Michael [1] http://sw-app.org/pub/restful-sparql.pdf -- Dr. Michael Hausenblas LiDRC - Linked Data Research Centre DERI - Digital Enterprise Research Institute NUIG - National University of Ireland, Galway Ireland, Europe Tel. +353 91 495730 http://linkeddata.deri.ie/ http://sw-app.org/about.html > From: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org> > Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 08:38:35 +0100 > To: AWWSW TF <public-awwsw@w3.org> > Subject: ideas: the REST of HTTP & the SPARQL of GET > Resent-From: AWWSW TF <public-awwsw@w3.org> > Resent-Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 07:39:11 +0000 > > Larry Masinter points out that the HTTP spec is really two beasts: An > operational, testable portion dealing mostly with syntax of messages > and with caching, couched in MUST language, and a separate REST level > dealing with "resource state" that would not be testable (falsifiable) > by someone observing an exchange since the only way to know whether > it's being followed would be to look inside the server. I'm thinking > this second level, which I've been avoiding, could be given its own > class and properties, and that the treatment of this part of the HTTP > spec might be done instead of (or coincident with) a treatment of REST > as described by Roy. > > The class of REST-compliant resources is what HTTP calls a "network > data object" and it would be a proper subclass of "HttpResource". > Everything else is just a "network service". > > My other recent idea: > > We are suggesting that some response messages can be translated into > RDF. In the same way we should be able to say that a request message > (such as a GET) can be translated into SPARQL, or something very close > to it. > > Jonathan >
Received on Tuesday, 10 November 2009 09:29:40 UTC