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

Re: Format of SPARQL Update results

From: Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 06:09:23 -0500
Message-ID: <4D132DE3.8060905@thefigtrees.net>
To: Alexandre Passant <alexandre.passant@deri.org>
CC: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On 12/23/2010 5:07 AM, Alexandre Passant wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Reading the discussion about JSON serialization of query results, I figured out that we don't have a proper format for results of SPARQL Update queries.
> Since we agreed to send only success / failure as a result, I suggest to use the boolean return form (as for ASK) with true / false values depending on the success / failure (so that it does not require updates to the XML / JSON result formats).
>
> I don't think we need a formal vote for that, but if anyone objects or have other opinions, please let me know.
> If not, I'll include that to the next round of publishing.

The prevailing opinion at the protocol TC was that there is no response 
other than success or failure -- in the protocol, success or failure is 
indicated with HTTP response codes. I'd expect that in the SPARQL Update 
document itself, the response is left abstract ("success" or "failure"), 
just as in the SPARQL Query document the result is abstract (a solution 
list).

If an implementation handles a SPARQL Update request via any mechanism 
other than the SPARQL Protocol (e.g. via an API), then it's up to them 
how to concretely instantiate "success" and "failure".

Lee

>
> Thanks,
>
> Alex.
>
> --
> Dr. Alexandre Passant
> Digital Enterprise Research Institute
> National University of Ireland, Galway
> :me owl:sameAs<http://apassant.net/alex>  .
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 23 December 2010 11:10:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:44 GMT