- From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 19:30:03 +0100
- To: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
On 19/06/12 15:49, Gregory Williams wrote: > On Jun 19, 2012, at 6:10 AM, Andy Seaborne wrote: > >> In a single update request there may be operations that use >> USING/USING NAMED and some that do not. So one operation may use >> USING/USING NAMED to get a dynamically constructed dataset and the >> next operation does not use USING* so it can see the results of an >> earlier operation. > > Interesting. I hadn't considered that. This is where we run up > against the few SD "features" being under specified, I guess. So do > you think the current wording is acceptable? It is acceptable - Tweaking: "will dereference" -- not sure about "will", it's seems definite that will happen, maybe it's a possibility. But I can't suggest better wording, all that I tried seemed worse! One of: s/query evaluation/graph pattern evaluation/ (pedantic) s/query evaluation/query or update evaluation/ (mention update) s/query evaluation/evaluation/ (covers any evaluation) Andy > > thanks, .greg > >
Received on Tuesday, 19 June 2012 18:30:36 UTC