- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 17:18:28 +0100
- To: "Miles, AJ (Alistair)" <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>
- Cc: public-esw-thes@w3.org
Miles, AJ (Alistair) wrote: >>The text looks good to me. +1 on including it. I'm not sure the >>SPARQL mention is needed there, it may be more likely that >>the info resource will contain within it description of relevant >>SPARQL endpoints. Do we have enough experience of this bit >>to feel confident encouraging the redirect to be the SPARQL endpoint? >> >> > >I don't know about experience, but why not? Otherwise, for hash namespaces, how does the machine discover a service to query without first downloading the whole lot? > > OK so I guess the open question in my mind is whether the info resource we point to is something that directly serves as a SPARQL endpoint, or whether it is a service description (WSDL or whatever the RDF Data Access WG decide to recommend) that describes such an endpoint. If we say that doc 'supports' SPARQL we're perhaps constraining more towards it being the actual endpoint. Well, except none of this is compulsory. Dan
Received on Tuesday, 21 June 2005 16:19:36 UTC