- From: James Leigh <james@3roundstones.com>
- Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 09:11:56 -0400
- To: Alexandre Bertails <bertails@w3.org>
- Cc: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, public-ldp-patch@w3.org, Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>, Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>, Linked Data Platform WG <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>
On Thu, 2013-10-17 at 22:57 -0400, Alexandre Bertails wrote:
> TurtlePatch
> -----------
>
> Champion: Sandro
>
> Summary: subset of SPARQL Update with INSERT and DELETE clauses.
>
> Example:
>
> [[
> PREFIX foaf <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/>
> PREFIX s <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#>
> DELETE DATA {
> <http://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/card#i> foaf:mbox
> <mailto:timbl@w3.org>
> }
> INSERT DATA {
> <http://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/card#i> foaf:mbox
> <mailto:timbl@hushmail.com>
> <http://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/card> s:comment "This is my
> general description of myself.\n\nI try to keep data here up to date and
> it should be considered authoritative."
> }
> ]]
>
> Pros:
> * can be implemented using full SPARQL implementation
> * easy to implement from scratch (parser + runtime)
>
> Cons:
> * no support for bnodes
>
> Status:
> * I implemented this approach in Banana-RDF
>
> Remark: Sandro talked about "TurtlePatch plus variables" but I'm not
> sure what that means exactly by reading his spec. Until I see a
> solution properly considering bnodes, it will be a -1 for me.
While "no support for bnodes" is technically true for this format, LDP
does permit skolemization[1]. I personally don't expect this group to
agree on any PATCH format that includes blank nodes and I think the only
acceptable solution is to give them blank node identifiers through a
skolemization process as Sandro suggested earlier.
With blank node identifiers, the above solution handles blank nodes
quite well, IMHO, without any of the NP problems other solutions have.
[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/#section-skolemization
Regards,
James
Received on Friday, 18 October 2013 13:12:30 UTC