- From: Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>
- Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 01:53:48 -0400
- To: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
The main extensibility point for SPARQL that we've considered so far is
service description. Standardizing service description would give a way
for SPARQL clients to determine the capabilities of a SPARQL endpoint
and adjust their behavior/expectations accordingly.
It would also provide a framework within which the WG and/or community
could begin defining URIs for features that some but not all SPARQL
endpoints might support. This would hopefully encourage engines to
converge on similar implementations of extensions under common URIs, and
aid further standardization efforts down the road.
I see the pragmas proposed feature (
http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:Pragmas ) as another
potential extensibility point.
The idea behind a pragma is relatively simple: provide a way for a query
to include arbitrary metadata that can affect the operation of the
query. "Advice" to the query engine, you could say.
Pragmas are implemented in Virtuoso in a way that they can pertain to an
entire query, a single triple pattern, or a group pattern ({ ... }). Of
course, other designs are possible to simplify grammatical changes.
We've considered implementing pragmas in the past in Glitter in Open
Anzo, but have not yet done so.
As I've said in the past, I'm keen to consider standardizing something
like 4 features + extensibility points that will encourage convergence
around other SPARQL extensions outside this WG's lifetime in lieu of
standardizing something like 8 features and leaving the extensibility
points as they are today.
I also have a bit of a belief (more on this in another post if I get to
it), that extension points fall in the category of standardization for
which it's more appropriate for the standards group to be on the leading
edge of the "feature curve" rather than the trailing edge (vis a vis
implementations).
I'd like to hear what other WG members feel about pragmas as an
extensibility point for SPARQL and if there are any other
implementations of them out there.
If anyone can speak of practical experience with XQuery's pragmas as
well, I'd love to learn about that.
Lee
Received on Friday, 10 April 2009 05:54:57 UTC