W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > January to March 2010

Re: Review of "SPARQL 1.1 Update"

From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 10:55:45 +0000
Cc: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@talis.com>, SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <BCBAB95B-7601-4195-8E90-151C8A4DBE84@garlik.com>
To: Paul Gearon <gearon@ieee.org>
On 7 Jan 2010, at 18:35, Paul Gearon wrote:
...
>> 2/ Ambiguity.
>> This sequence of tokens:
>>
>> WITH <uri>
>> DELETE { ?x :p ?v }
>> INSERT { ?x :q ?v }
>> WHERE { ?x :q 123 }
>>
>> can be parsed at least 2 different ways:
>>
>> As two operations:
>> WITH <uri>
>> DELETE { ?x :p ?v }
>> # No WHERE
>> # followed by a separate operation
>> # No WITH
>> INSERT { ?x :q ?v }
>> WHERE { ?x :q 123 }
>>
>> or as
>> # All one operation
>> WITH <uri>
>> DELETE { ?x :p ?v }
>> INSERT { ?x :q ?v }
>> WHERE { ?x :q 123 }
>> # WITH and WHERE included
>
> The use of semicolon to join these was discussed in the past. That
> would seem to me to be the most sensible approach. I've put it in for
> now, but would appreciate comment.


Semicolon to separate, surely? Or maybe I'm completely  
misunderstanding what's going on.

- 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 Friday, 8 January 2010 10:56:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:41 GMT