(In response to MH-1)
> Not sure if this is already on your radar, but in order to ensure a wide > uptake concerning end-point discovery, I propose to register a well-known > URI as per RFC5785 , i.e. to add the following to the SPARQL 1.1 Service > Description document: > > === > 5. Well-Known URI Registration > > URI suffix: sparql > > Change controller: W3C. > > Specification document(s): This document. > === > > This registry is quite new (as well as the RFC defining it) and I so far > failed to figure what suffixes have been registered already. Nevertheless, I > think it would tremendously help and hope that this is the right place to do > it. If not, please let me know and I'll explore alternatives.
The working group considered well-known URIs during discussion of service description discovery (see "Option 3" in  as a starting point). There was very little support for the idea, and we decided to proceed with the current discovery mechanism of using the service URL to return a service description. For the issue to be reconsidered, I think we would need to see an proposal for what metadata you think should be returned from the /.well-known/sparql URL, taking into consideration the potential presence of multiple endpoints within one http server and RFC5785's suggestion that such a resource only return metadata (potentially making it a poor choice for a service URL).
Gregory Williams, on behalf of the SPARQL working group.