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

Re: ISSUE-48: Less verbose delete syntax

From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 19:34:46 +0000
Cc: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
Message-Id: <1864C59D-00E8-43F1-BAEB-5C63FD0CD976@garlik.com>
To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@talis.com>
On 8 Nov 2009, at 17:30, Andy Seaborne wrote:
>
> >> Isn't this going to lead to potentially easy mistakes to make?
> >> Omitting the ";" isn't necessarily a syntax error - it's a  
> different
> >> but valid set of requests.
> >
> > I think the ; is intended to be mandatory between operations.
>
> I'm not sure it solves the problem in a useful (not making errors  
> too easy) way.  Omitting ";" needs to lead to a synatx error, not an  
> alternative parsing.
>
> Example: from the F2F notes (and so I may have misunderstood):
>
> DELETE { ... }
> INSERT { ... }
> WHERE { ... }
>
> and
>
> DELETE { ... } ;
> INSERT { ... }
> WHERE { ... }
>
> are legal and different.  DELETE WHERE is better - maybe not better  
> enough.

Well,

DELETE WHERE { ... }
INSERT { ... }
WHERE { ... }

would presumably not be legal syntax? So I think there's less room for  
confusion with mandatory ;'s overall.

> Looked at it like that, different names for specific shortcuts might  
> be safer.  e.g. REMOVE { ... }

Perhaps, though It's more near-synonym verbs to learn.

> DELETE DATA, INSERT DATA could do with their own names.
>
> It's a tricky balance of regularity and avoiding all-too-easy  
> traps.  It is also a value judgement.

Yup, it's tricky stuff. I quite like DATA as a consistent modifier  
though.

- Steve

-- 
Steve Harris, CTO, Garlik Limited
2 Sheen Road, Richmond, TW9 1AE, UK
+44(0)20 8973 2465  http://www.garlik.com/
Registered in England and Wales 535 7233 VAT # 849 0517 11
Registered office: Thames House, Portsmouth Road, Esher, Surrey, KT10  
9AD
Received on Sunday, 8 November 2009 19:35:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:40 GMT