Re: Proposal: register /.well-known/sparql with IANA

On 12/26/12 4:01 PM, Hugh Glaser wrote:
> Hi.
> On 26 Dec 2012, at 07:50, Giovanni Tummarello <>
>   wrote:
>>>> A good argument ... for using sitemapsˇ
>>> Yes, those too.
>>> Fundamentally, we need to give discoverability and associated patterns a lot
>>> more focus that has been done in the past. This is such a critical component
>>> for making Linked Data easier to discover and appreciate.
>> good point re discoverability but you need clients too.
>> we rolled out something very simple to understand and deploy in
>> sitemap back in 2007 even.
> And very useful it is too!
> And you are so right to focus on consuming.
> But sorry to disappoint you, Giovanni :-) but I do use sitemaps as a consumer - and they are great.
> For our (as was I need to get bibliographic data.
> This can be hard work - and using OAI-PMH is not for the faint-hearted.
> DSpace is therefore a challenge, but because ePrints offers Linked Data supported by sitemaps it is pretty straightforward, and we can keep it all up to date as well.
> (The stuff goes in, and of course you can find out about it at which leads to
> I think Kingsley's point that they lean towards crawlers is valid. I don't know of people who get tiny bits of data based around sitemaps.
> But I can see no point at all in defining new ways of doing things if we don't even use what we have.
> Unless we can be confident they will be useful, fit for some purpose, etc..
> Here's a suggestion: let's have Reference Implementations. This is the norm for a lot of standards proposals.
> But when I say Reference Implementation, I mean the whole thing. So that includes the consumers (clients, I think is what Kingsley called them).
> So no progress on proposals without a system that uses the proposal to do something useful that is not just a pedagogical example.
> If people want a /.well-known/sparql (or anything else) they should show us a Reference Client that uses it usefully, while also considering how the same thing might be achieved easily using other technologies.


> Best
> Hugh
>> it has a concept of "dataset" (each can have a dump a sparql endpoitn
>> and an extention used to serve resolvable uris)
>> a few data producers did actually implement it but the problem was on
>> the consumer side.
>> We consumed it ..okish at but nobody else did, because
>> there was no semantic web/linked data  client really ever.
>> focus was on "publish your data" and something will happen,
>> Can we think of a client that does something useful:
>> * for real and not for a made up use corner case easily solved with a
>> google search + 2 clicks.
>> * connected to the reality of everyday browsing and web usage e.g.
>> facebook, chrome browsing or mobile and not . So forget "alice wants
>> to publish her own foaf file. "
>> * generic enough and giving repeated value not to be a one off thing
>> not only usable in super narrow contexts.
>> * for real sustainability and growth, the value must be for both data
>> publisher and consumer,should be directly measurable in ways people
>> understand (roi etc)
>> the client, the use case == the value , everything follows from there.
>> Google etc clearly hits all the above except the client its
>> THEM and everyone goes trough them.
>> saying this in general for those not in specific to you kingsley :)
>> Gio



Kingsley Idehen	
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web:
Personal Weblog:
Twitter/ handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile:
LinkedIn Profile:

Received on Thursday, 27 December 2012 00:34:14 UTC