W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > January to March 2011

Re: WSDL and POSTing SPARQL Update requests directly

From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2011 16:11:04 +0000
Message-ID: <4D21F518.50103@epimorphics.com>
To: Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>
CC: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>

On 03/01/11 15:13, Lee Feigenbaum wrote:
> On 12/29/2010 5:22 AM, Andy Seaborne wrote:
>> On 24/12/10 19:21, Lee Feigenbaum wrote:
>>> The first topic we discussed on the protocol teleconference was the
>>> content of an HTTP request for the SPARQL Update Protocol. The consensus
>>> was as listed at
>>> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Protocol#What_do_you_send_for_a_SPARQL_update_request.3F
>>> :
>>> """
>>> PROPOSED: SPARQL Update requests can be POSTed as either
>>> application/x-www-form-urlencoded or application/sparql-update, pending
>>> discovery of how to do the latter in WSDL 2
>>> """
>>> The first half is the analog to SPARQL query. In that case, you send an
>>> HTTP request like
>>> POST /foo/bar/sparql HTTP/1.1
>>> ...
>>> Content-type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded
>>> default-graph-uri=...&named-graph-uri=...&named-graph-uri=...&update=<URL
>>> encoded
>>> update request string>
>> I'm not sure what &default-graph-uri= and &named-graph-uri= mean for an
>> SPARQL Update request.
> On the protocol teleconference, we discussed that they would define the
> RDF dataset against which graph patterns are evaluated -- a la USING and
> USING NAMED, as you say below.

My other reading was a protocol argument for WITH.

Would better names be:

-- same as WITH

-- same as USING

-- same as USING NAMED

Something to make it clear it is not the graph store being affected for 
the "using" ones.

For what semantics, in a query request, there is only one query and only 
one possible dataset description.  But in an update request there can be 
several operations, some with WITH, some without, and some with USING 
some without.

Do the parameters override all the operations?  This makes more sense to 
me but it does seem like a choice point in the design - anther choice 
would be override if there were no USING etc and keeping if an explicit 
USING, despite that being different to query but query is different 
because it can't have mixed combinations in one request.

Received on Monday, 3 January 2011 16:11:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:01:03 UTC