- From: Gregory Williams <greg@evilfunhouse.com>
- Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 00:20:19 -0400
- To: Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>
- Cc: "public-rdf-dawg@w3.org Group" <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On Sep 25, 2009, at 12:09 AM, Lee Feigenbaum wrote: > Ah, so you're suggesting this as a way for an endpoint to tell the > world what it does in the absence of FROM, FROM NAMED, and protocol > graph parameters? That makes perfect sense to me. > > (I had (mis-)interpreted it as a way to characterize the overall set > of graphs that the endpoint is capable of including in a query's RDF > dataset.) Well, (thinking out loud here,) I'd imagine that the defaultGraph stuff would only be for systems that provide a default dataset. The sd:namedGraph properties, though, could provide descriptions of the graphs that are available for use in a requested dataset. Perhaps that suggests a slight name change with the properties -- maybe the sd:namedGraph property should actually be something like sd:availableGraph (while keeping the subsequent properties for graphName and graphDescription). I imagine that URIs might pop up that can be used with the extension mechanism to describe the specifics of dataset handling (whether there's no dataset but lots of available graphs, or a default dataset, or no default but the ability to dereference any URL in a FROM/FROM NAMED clause). But in general I think there's value in providing enough in the SD vocab to point at descriptions of graphs (if any) that the endpoint is expected to commonly use (whether provided as a default dataset or not). .greg
Received on Friday, 25 September 2009 04:20:56 UTC