- From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 15:29:01 +0000
- To: "Wilde, Erik" <Erik.Wilde@emc.com>
- CC: "public-ldp-wg@w3.org" <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>, Roger Menday <roger.menday@uk.fujitsu.com>
On 10/12/12 15:14, Wilde, Erik wrote: >>> ... Query the RDF graph that describes a resource >>> ... Query something that returns a list of resources that match a >>> condition >>> ... Query an RDF graph, or RDF dataset, that is all RDF in this LDP >>> instance >>> ... Query a containers and it's contained resources (graph? dataset?) >>> ... and there probably other units (container that is automatically all >>> resources matching some pattern). > > we had some agreement that we cannot depend on LDP being implemented on > top of a SPARQL-capable back-end. which means that any generic SPARQL > capabilities are not possible. instead, we need LDP-specific query > capabilities, specifying queries of the LDP model. Yes, to not depend on SPARQL. But another query language seems to make LDP a system that is costly to integrate into a wider app situation. Would it be more than "find resources such that ..."? If so, there is a whole infratsructure (e.g. results formats) that may need defining. At least, define it by a mapping to SPARQL rather than define a independent QL. Andy
Received on Monday, 10 December 2012 15:29:36 UTC