- From: Yoshio FUKUSHIGE <fuku@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 12:24:52 +0900
- To: <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
EricP: I'm sorry, but I cannot see your point. > Easy to query provides a way for RDF tools that don't have SPARQL > interfaces to use a native API or query lang to get at the results. > For instance, TAP could GET a specific resource like > http://sparql.org/?q="..." > and use it's API to get at the results. Do you mean http://tap.stanford.edu/ by TAP? > However, since the results are XSLT-able, we can use some emergent > XSLT to transform results format into RDF. Thus, the above example > query would turn into > > http://xslt-service.org/?template=SPRes2RDF&doc=http://sparql.org/?q="..." > > Thus, I propose we do nothing about the RDF format because it can be > done post-standarization by interested parties. Are you saying that one can get a query result in a RDF format by transforming its XML format version? If so, my preference is rather opposite direction: we first design RDF format and then get the XML result (preferably, its RDF/XML serialization). How to ensure the interoperability/interchangeability of our (current and being tweaked) XML representation format and (to-be-determined) RDF format is another concern of mine. > XSLT can count. I've seen Dom make it count, but Dom gets it to do > lots of things that mortals can't. # Dom = Dominions / Dominations? : ) # I can't parse the last sentence, btw. Best, Yoshio fuku@w3.org fukushige.yoshio@jp.panasonic.com
Received on Thursday, 24 March 2005 03:24:57 UTC