Hi Johannes,
Thanks for your response!
An important design principal I had when I wrote the proposal was that I did not want to
force a database technology if someone would implement the spec. This was the major reason
for me not to use RDF or SPARQL in the spec. The spec should be implementable on other
technologies as well.
Of course this principal is up for discussion. Choosing a technology would probably
simplify the protocol and extend usage options (allowing more complex queries).
What do you think about this?
Also I have a more specific question on the example you provided. Is there a way to
'pre-define' namespaces in XMPP?
They way I see it is the XML stream is opened upon connection and there is no way to add
namespaces on the go hence the usage of the 'xmlns' attribute to switch to a
specific context.
Best regards,
Eelco
On 17 Mar 2015, at 14:03, Hund, Johannes
<johannes.hund(a)siemens.com> wrote:
Hello Eelco,
I discussed this with colleagues that are more active in semweb topics and they had the
suggestion to reuse more existing formats for serialization.
See attached an example using RDF/XML that also shows how a GeoSPARQL query could be
expressed in XML (using SWRL rules).
What do you think?
Best regards,
Johannes
This message may contain information that is not intended for you. If you are not the
addressee or if this message was sent to you by mistake, you are requested to inform the
sender and delete the message. TNO accepts no liability for the content of this e-mail,
for the manner in which you use it and for damage of any kind resulting from the risks
inherent to the electronic transmission of messages.