- From: Gregory Williams <greg@evilfunhouse.com>
- Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 11:43:27 -0400
- To: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
- Cc: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On Aug 11, 2009, at 11:33 AM, Steve Harris wrote: > On 11 Aug 2009, at 16:22, Orri Erling wrote: > >> For example, a triple of the form <end-point-uri> >> sparql:hasVoidGraph <uri-of-void-graph> . would indicate that >> specifying <uri-of-void-graph> as a graph of a query would give >> VOID content describing a graph available at this end point. > > That would also address the problem of multiple endpoints on one > store, as it allows the description to be explicit about what graph > should be queried. As long as the security model didn't present > different graph sets at different endpoints. > > One thing I don't like though is the VOID specificity, I'd like to > see any discovery mechanism be schema neutral. My SD vocab proposal includes a datasetDescription property for just such neutral descriptions. I imagine it could be used along with a rdf:type statement on the pointed-to dataset in the SD so that you could sort out which was the VoiD description before going to retrieve it. http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:ServiceDescriptions#Strawman_Proposal_for_Service_Description_Vocabulary_and_URIs .greg
Received on Tuesday, 11 August 2009 15:44:04 UTC