This proposal is über-minimalistic compared to what I suggested initially, but I realized that generic SPARQL support is a huge can of worm (see the comment at the top of the sparql.rs file).
So decided to go for the least common denominator. The drawback is that anyone requiring (even slightly) advanced SPARQL support will need to rely on implementation specific methods. But I still think that this minimal API has value for interoperability.
pchampin
commented
3 years ago
This addresses #19.
This proposal is über-minimalistic compared to what I suggested initially, but I realized that generic SPARQL support is a huge can of worm (see the comment at the top of the
sparql.rsfile).So decided to go for the least common denominator. The drawback is that anyone requiring (even slightly) advanced SPARQL support will need to rely on implementation specific methods. But I still think that this minimal API has value for interoperability.
Any comment welcome.