- From: Kjetil Kjernsmo <Kjetil.Kjernsmo@computas.com>
- Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 15:35:42 +0200
- To: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
On Wednesday 27 May 2009 13:14:44 Seaborne, Andy wrote: > I am now more convinced that just HTTP is insufficient because (a) in > practice, there isn't always an HTTP server and (b) some operations are > very painful to fit into this style (e.g. DELETE by pattern). Agreed. > I didn't hear strong support for phasing the work because several people > want graph stores, not single graphs, to be updateable. Well, I think there is strong support for updating either all graphs, or a named graph, but have anyone come forward with a case for updating more than one named graph in a single query? I think INSERT INTO <uri> is very important, but I don't know if there needs to be support for multiple graphs. > I have been trying to find groups of operations so we can be clear about > what does what: > > Tentative suggestion: > > 1/ Graph store management: Create/removal of graphs (names of graphs) from > the graph store. > > 2/ Whole graph operation (graph exists - may have implicit create/delete): > clear, replace contents > > 3/ Changes to (nameable) graph: load data into (add triples), delete data, > insert data, delete by pattern, insert by pattern (this seems less > significant) Good. Also, HTTP protocol use, I don't to what extent we should view that as separate? Kind regards Kjetil Kjernsmo -- Senior Knowledge Engineer / SPARQL F&R Editor Mobile: +47 986 48 234 Email: kjetil.kjernsmo@computas.com Web: http://www.computas.com/ | SHARE YOUR KNOWLEDGE | Computas AS PO Box 482, N-1327 Lysaker | Phone:+47 6783 1000 | Fax:+47 6783 1001
Received on Wednesday, 27 May 2009 13:36:22 UTC