- From: Richard Newman <r.newman@reading.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 15:23:00 -0800
- To: Fred Zemke <fred.zemke@oracle.com>
- Cc: public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
I think the idea is to consider it as overriding, rather than scoping. Consider: if the protocol can override the query's defaults, then one can re-use a query, supplying variable datasources in the protocol request without having to re-formulate the query. What might be useful is allowing a means of augmentation, as well as substitution; otherwise, it's likely that *either* protocol dataset specifications *or* query dataset specifications will be used, but not both. -R On 12 Jan 2006, at 09:33, Fred Zemke wrote: > > 9. Specifying RDF datasets > first para, last sentence "The RDF dataset may also be specified in a > SPARQL protocol request, in which case the protocol description > overrides > any description in the query itself." This rule violates the usual > assumption about scoping, that the innermost specification of > something > should prevail over specification that occur in an outer scope. In > this case, the protocol layer is an outer scope and the query itself > is carried within the protocol, so one would expect that the protocol > could provide defaults, but that the query itself should have the > final > say. > > Fred Zemke >
Received on Thursday, 12 January 2006 23:23:02 UTC