- From: james anderson <james@dydra.com>
- Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 09:06:19 +0000
- To: "public-sparql-dev@w3.org" <public-sparql-dev@w3.org>
good morning, > On 2015-09-17, at 02:10, Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com> wrote: > > http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/REC-sparql11-http-rdf-update-20130321/#http-post > > […] > > The problem is, taken literally the INSERT operation won't work. For example: in general, that recommendation would be much easier to comprehend were the examples set off better and were they complete. the w3c editorial standard is much improved with recommendations such as those for the linked data platform (eg http://www.w3.org/TR/ldp/). still, even the other 1.1 protocol document (http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-protocol/) displays its examples more completely and the reader would be much better served, were at least that convention to be carried over to the graph store protocol descriptions in a possible editorial revision. were that to have been the case, it would have been much easier for a reader to recognize that the " .. RDF payload ..” was to be understood in the context of the respective content media type. best regards, from berlin, --- james anderson | james@dydra.com | http://dydra.com
Received on Thursday, 17 September 2015 09:06:50 UTC