W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > January to March 2012

Re: Graph store protocol editor's draft updated

From: Chimezie Ogbuji <chimezie@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 00:39:12 -0500
Message-ID: <CAKSO3uk5BKrD0QZb+66xJQbHE5NsOkKgnA2etJ-SH_E6RVtRbg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Cc: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Thanks for suggested text.  I was having a problem coming up with a
sentence that states that the 'Graph Store Protocol' explicitly
applies only to SPARQL 1.1 Graph Stores that didn't seem horribly
redundant.  I still feel such an explicit sentence doesn't serve any
tangible purpose, and the resolution does not require explicit
expository language.  However, this is not a major point sticking
point for me, so I will modify the abstract in the manner that you
suggest below.

I'm currently without access to my primary laptop for a few days and
so unable to address Birte's review and the changes below but hope to
be able to do so tomorrow or the day after.

On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 2:57 PM, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org> wrote:
>        This document describes how to use HTTP operations to manage the
>        RDF graphs stored by a SPARQL 1.1 graph store.  This RESTful
>        interface is an alternative to the SPARQL 1.1 Update protocol.
>        Most of the operations defined here can be performed using that
>        interface, but for some clients or servers, this interface may
>        be easier to implement or work with.  This specification may
>        serve as a suggestion but it not normative for HTTP operations
>        on RDF graphs which are managed outside of a SPARQL 1.1 graph
>        store.
>
> ... and maybe also work that last sentence (or something like it) into
> the introduction.
>
>    -- Sandro
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 14 February 2012 05:39:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:47 GMT