- From: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2007 18:14:44 +0100
- To: "Richard Newman" <rnewman@franz.com>
- Cc: "Seaborne, Andy" <andy.seaborne@hp.com>, public-sparql-dev@w3.org
On 09/03/07, Richard Newman <rnewman@franz.com> wrote: > > I like the look of this. Ditto. > Is this the appropriate forum for discussions, Andy? Some already on Planet RDF - Richard C. beat me to it: http://dowhatimean.net/2007/03/sparul%e2%80%94sparql-update-language Key concern there - [[ Max Völkel and I did a very rough proposal for a similar language back last year. We received some criticism over this: Tunneling application protocols over HTTP is not an optimal use of the web. Case in point: the WS-* stack. I tried to work out the issues by asking how RESTful SQL would look like, a potentially illuminating analogy. I found the results inconclusive—I understand the concerns raised by REST proponents, but haven't seen a better alternative. The main question, I think, is one of scope: Is SPARQL Update intended as an SQL-like language that applications use to communicate with their local or nearby data store? Or is it intended as public web infrastructure, similar to Web 2.0 APIs and HTTP PUT? ]] (Presumably I'll > have *something* to say when I study it in detail!) Ditto. My first impressions (the only bit that would perhaps have been worth bringing over here is subsumed by Richard's comment above): http://dannyayers.com/2007/03/09/sparql-update > Thanks, Ditto, Danny. -- http://dannyayers.com
Received on Friday, 9 March 2007 17:14:51 UTC