- 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