- From: Leigh Dodds <leigh@ldodds.com>
- Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 09:27:05 +0100
- To: "Paul Tyson" <phtyson@sbcglobal.net>
- Cc: "semantic-web at W3C" <semantic-web@w3c.org>, public-sparql-dev@w3.org, ndw@nwalsh.com
Hi, I have to admit to being in two minds about this. On the one hand, I think it'd be great for there to be a SPARQL processing step in XProc, but on the other hand, I'm not really sure whether it really belongs in the core XProc spec. As its stands you can do some RDF/XML processing in XProc as it is: * use XSLT to generate RDF/XML from arbitrary XML documents * use the http request support to invoke a SPARQL endpoint and process the results to add to the XML being processed * transform RDF/XML (probably constrained subsets) * extra data from RDF/XML (again, probably subsets) * using extension points to include native SPARQL or other operations (e.g. putting RDF/XML into a store) So, RDF/XML processing seems to be as well supported in XProc as any other vocabulary. I think it'd make more sense to layer on additional support using the existing extension points in the language. If a "p:sparql" operation were included directly in the core then this would further raise the bar for an XProc implementor. IMO then, it would be better to pursue this as a community activity as Norm suggested. We could define a ex:sparql step via a community created spec and illustrate the utility by providing an implementation for one of the existing Xproc processors. Cheers, L. On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 4:02 AM, Paul Tyson <phtyson@sbcglobal.net> wrote: > > XProc [1] is in Last Call, and as it stands has no built-ins for RDF > processing. Do any in the community agree with me that having some standard > pipeline facilities for RDF processing would be a good thing? > > See xproc comment thread on this topic starting at [2]. The chair of the > XProc WG will entertain proposals for a few RDF-related steps to be added to > v1.0, and is looking to the RDF community to spec these out. > > This is a request for comments on this topic. I am also seeking comments on > how best to pursue this (assuming there is enough interest) so as to provide > the XProc WG with a viable proposal in a relatively short time. > > Thanks, > --Paul > > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-xproc-20080814/ > [2] > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-comments/2008Aug/0009.html > >
Received on Friday, 22 August 2008 08:27:42 UTC