W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > April to June 2009

Re: Reflections on Update

From: Paul Gearon <gearon@ieee.org>
Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 13:01:38 -0500
Message-ID: <a25ac1f0905181101k398cc24cpb894594b39e6eb3d@mail.gmail.com>
To: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
Cc: "Seaborne, Andy" <andy.seaborne@hp.com>, Alexandre Passant <alexandre.passant@deri.org>, SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 8:50 AM, Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com> wrote:
> On 15 May 2009, at 16:53, Paul Gearon wrote:
>>
>>> A use case I have in mind is the ability to collect data from a number of
>>> places with an update script of
>>>
>>> LOAD <url1>
>>> LOAD <url2>
>>> LOAD <url3>
>>> ...
>>
>> Certainly, and I support this. The difficulty I'm pointing out is the
>> case where the data to be loaded is being held by the client (this
>> forms the majority of our use cases).
>>
>> Even if these LOAD commands were not available, they could be
>> simulated with (for the first url):
>>
>> INSERT { ?s ?p ?o } WHERE { GRAPH <url1> {?s ?p ?o} }
>
> That assumes a meaning of GRAPH that the SPARQL spec as written doesn't
> explicitly sanction. It doesn't bad it either, but still.

Ah yes, sorry. It slipped my mind when I wrote this. However, I was
(pleasantly) surprised to discover how many implementations will fall
back to treating unrecognized IRIs as retrievable URLs.

So you can forget I said that part.  :-)

Regards,
Paul Gearon
Received on Monday, 18 May 2009 18:02:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:38 GMT