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

RE: [ACTION-33] Trying to sort the SPARQL/Update issues.

From: Seaborne, Andy <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 15:25:48 +0000
To: Kjetil Kjernsmo <Kjetil.Kjernsmo@computas.com>, "public-rdf-dawg@w3.org" <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <B6CF1054FDC8B845BF93A6645D19BEA3646C2E0D77@GVW1118EXC.americas.hpqcorp.net>


> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-rdf-dawg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-rdf-dawg-
> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Kjetil Kjernsmo
> Sent: 27 May 2009 14:36
> To: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
> Subject: Re: [ACTION-33] Trying to sort the SPARQL/Update issues.
> 
> 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?

Moving a data item between graphs (delete from one, insert into another).

> 
> I think INSERT INTO <uri> is very important, but I don't know if there
> needs
> to be support for multiple graphs.

Agreed - the whole "[INTO <uri>]*" thing is over doing it but it is simple.


> 
> > 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?

I don't see the HTTP protocol use as adding operations that can't be done by the language.  They should be aligned.  The language will probably be able to do more.

	Andy

> 
> 
> 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 15:27:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:39 GMT