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

Re: Comments on SPARQL 1.1. Update (2)

From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2010 23:30:55 +0100
Message-ID: <4C7ED41F.5070406@epimorphics.com>
To: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Mistakenly only sent to Alex.

	Andy

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Comments on SPARQL 1.1. Update (2)
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2010 14:21:43 +0100
From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
To: Alexandre Passant <alexandre.passant@deri.org>



On 31/08/10 13:50, Alexandre Passant wrote:
...
>>
>> [[
>> To illustrate the use of the WITH clause, an operation of the general form:
>>
>> WITH<g1>  INSERT { x y z } DELETE { a b c } WHERE { ... }
>>
>> Is considered equivalent to:
>>
>> INSERT { GRAPH<g1>  { x y z } } DELETE { GRAPH<g1>  { a b c } } USING<g1>  WHERE { ... }
>>
>> Note that WITH will be ignored for any section that stipulates a GRAPH or for the entire WHERE clause if a USING is present.
>> ]]
>>
>> The last sentence isn't right:
>>
>> INSERT {<a>  <b>  <c>  GRAPH<g1>  { x y z } }
>>
>> stipulates a GRAPH, it just isn't the whole pattern.  WITH applies to the<a>  <b>  <c>  part.
>>
>
> Is your example complete ? I cannot see the relationship with the WITH.

No - here's a complete example

WITH <iri> INSERT {<a>  <b>  <c>  GRAPH<g1>  { x y z } } WHERE {}

The problem is the word "section".  I can see a reading where "section"
is the whole of "INSERT {}" or WHERE{} -- the look more like "sections
of a request" than individual GRAPH parts.

(it's related to my earlier comment on modify_template)

	Andy

>
> Alex.
>
>> 	Andy
>>
>
> --
> Dr. Alexandre Passant
> Digital Enterprise Research Institute
> National University of Ireland, Galway
> :me owl:sameAs<http://apassant.net/alex>  .
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 1 September 2010 22:31:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:43 GMT