W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > March 2011

Re: [JSON] The case for a triple-based approach

From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 18:58:19 +0000
Cc: RDF Working Group WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <64797C90-602E-4A5F-BAB9-E988570E1BA1@cyganiak.de>
To: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
On 10 Mar 2011, at 15:19, Dan Brickley wrote:
> Don't we already *almost* have that?

Yes, *almost*.

> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-json-res/  (WG Note not a REC, so far)
> This handles "SPARQL variable binding and boolean query results" but
> not RDF graph results. (Perhaps those could be encoded by acting as if
> variables ?s ?p ?o and ?g were requested?).

This might well be one possible way of specifying a triple-based JSON serialization of RDF. It would still need to be written down in some spec.

> Having SPARQL JSON results defined by two unrelated specs could be confusing!

Yes, it's somewhat confusing, but as Ivan said, the SPARQL WG shouldn't specify new RDF graph serializations because that touches upon much broader issues than “just” querying RDF. Also note the situation with XML-based result formats: SELECT (SPARQL XML result format) and CONSTRUCT/DESCRIBE (RDF/XML) are defined in two unrelated specs.

Received on Thursday, 10 March 2011 18:58:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:04:04 UTC