- From: Seaborne, Andy <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
- Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 09:56:49 +0100
- To: kendall@monkeyfist.com
- CC: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Kendall Clark wrote: > On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 06:31:28PM +0100, Seaborne, Andy wrote: > > >>Would it be possible to do it the other way round? > > > Yes, of course. I considered doing it this way around, precisely for the > reasons you suggest: > > >>There are deployed HTTP based examples services (mine, Dave's, cwm's SPARQL >>server) and there are already embedded links using the "query=" form e.g. >>on http://esw.w3.org/topic/DawgShows > > But I was gonna go with sparql-query because it's more specific, and "query" > could be used in a future version of the protocol for RDF query languages > other than SPARQL. I think that's worth the change over, since > "sparql-query" does work, for both, today, though with the cost you suggest. > > So it's certain, but small incompatible change today versus probable, but > larger incompatible change in the future. I'm not hugely committed either > way, but I will note that folks deploying to an unfinished standard should > be prepared for gratuitous-seeming changes... :> > > I'm happy leaving the change to a straw poll during tomorrow's call. > > Cheers, > Kendall > In the SOAP form, the element is already qualified by the namespace so using "query" not "sparql-query" is clear. (It also happens to be the outer element name.) For the HTTP form, the argument is that "query" could be used in a future version of the protocol and that there will be a "probable, but larger incompatible change in the future.". But SPARQL is the protocol - I dont understand the "probable". This seems to be weakly reserving the word against an unspecified need and thus does not even encourage migration from todays services which do use "query" - they shouldn't offer both "sparql-query" and "query" for compatibity because "query" is for something else. The other oddity I see is that we now have the query language name in the request when we have previously decided not to have a "lang=" parameter. I thought we settled on the query language being part of the service - different language, different service. "sparql-query" to allow for other query languages seems to be moving back a multi-language per service design and that is better done with a "lang=" parameter. This does given an extension point - if there is no "lang=" it would mean "SPARQL classic", if there is a "lang=" parameter, it woudl name the language. Andy
Received on Tuesday, 30 August 2005 08:57:38 UTC