Re: newbie question about sparql and 200

On Aug 14, 2008, at 1:32 PM, Dan Connolly wrote:

> On Thu, 2008-08-14 at 13:09 -0400, Alan Ruttenberg wrote:
> [...]
>> Why is the note necessary? In fact it seems backwards:
>>>>>>> "The FROM NAMED syntax suggests that the IRI identifies the
>>>>>>> corresponding graph, but the relationship between an IRI and a
>>>>>>> graph
>>>>>>> in an RDF dataset is indirect. The IRI identifies a resource,
>>>>>>> and the
>>>>>>> resource is represented by a graph (or, more precisely: by a
>>>>>>> document that serializes a graph). For further details see
>>>>>>> [WEBARCH]."
>> That is, the IRI identifies the graph, and the representation is a
>> serialization of that graph. How is it different than asking for any
>> document, and getting back either html, or rtf, or whatever?
> Graphs are like integers or strings; they don't have state.
> Documents, in the sense of "the front page of the new york times"
> do have state; i.e. they change over time.

Not all documents have state.

> To say that <> identifies a graph
> leads to a contradiction when two different GET requests
> return different graphs/representations.

How could this happen if they can't change? (as you posit above)
BTW, it's fine for two different representations to be returned  -  
doesn't mean the graph(= underlying resource) changed.

> p.s. I hope that helps a little, but I really prefer to let specs  
> speak for themselves.

My preference as well. Would be fine if the specs spoke clearly.

> p.p.s. is there some test case we could explore? or something
> less abstract than <>?
> -- 
> Dan Connolly, W3C
> gpg D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E

Received on Thursday, 14 August 2008 17:39:07 UTC