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: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 12:02:33 +0000
Cc: Paul Gearon <gearon@ieee.org>, SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <0A4BBEE9-9687-4154-ABA6-22FB6506A2C1@garlik.com>
To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@talis.com>
On 11 Jan 2010, at 11:57, Andy Seaborne wrote:
>>> I think that introducing ";" for all operations because this one  
>>> short
>>> form needs it is not balanced so I'm keen to find a way to avoid  
>>> that
>>> necessity.
>> Ah, I was thinking that the last ; would be optional, like . and  
>> triples.
> I was assuming that also.  It's that every (multi-operation)  
> sequence now needs to have ";"s when the syntax issue is confined to  
> the abbreviated short form of DELETE that strikes me as not ideal.

Well, the cost is that you have to type a ";", but the advantage it  
should be clearer to users what the expression means. I don't really  
see that as a significant cost.

Alternatives involving scoping brackets or similar require more  
complex syntactic structures, and affect even single expressions.

> I also think that multiple operations in one request will not be  
> uncommon.  Basic data loading might be commonly one operation  
> although surely much of the need for SPARQL Update Language is for  
> those operations not done by the HTTP update style.  It will include  
> things like ensuring graphs exist before other operations happen.

I agree, I'd expect multiple operations to be fairly common.

- Steve
Received on Monday, 11 January 2010 12:04:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:00:59 UTC