Re: Restpark - Minimal RESTful API for querying RDF triples

Sure.
But it isn't about the format - it's the content.
I actually thought this was an April Fool to start with.
I just can't work out what it returns, other than "found" or "not found", or similar.

On 16 Apr 2013, at 21:26, Luca Matteis <lmatteis@gmail.com>
 wrote:

> Hugh, I am actually still thinking about this. Was probably going to opt for JSON-LD.
> 
> 
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 10:04 PM, Hugh Glaser <hg@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
> I may be the only one, but I can't work out with any confidence what JSON your query returns.
> My first assumption was that it would usually return only "found" or "not found".
> 
> Can you give me a real example of a Restpark URI with 3 URIs and the JSON returned?
> You could add this to the web site.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> On 16 Apr 2013, at 18:52, Luca Matteis <lmatteis@gmail.com>
>  wrote:
> 
> > I have recently created Restpark: http://lmatteis.github.io/restpark/
> >
> > It's my way of pushing a standard RESTful interface for accessing RDF data. Still in its very infancy but hopefully it can be something to consider. I personally think the Semantic Web community desperately needs a simpler protocol for querying RDF, along side SPARQL. I have nothing against SPARQL, it's an important standard to have. But something simpler and RESTful needs to be part of the Semantic Web stack.
> >
> > The entire web community is used to consuming APIs as simple HTTP requests (REST). Would you imagine GitHub, Flickr, or any other web-service API actually exposing SQL instead of their RESTful API? It would make things a bit more complicated for third-parties in my opinion, but more importantly it would make things so much more complicated for services to implement.
> >
> > I would love to think what the community thinks about this.
> >
> > Best,
> > Luca
> 
>

Received on Tuesday, 16 April 2013 20:34:50 UTC