- From: Steve Speicher <sspeiche@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2013 20:17:48 -0400
- To: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
- Cc: "public-ldp-wg@w3.org" <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>
Received on Tuesday, 9 July 2013 00:18:14 UTC
On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 2:40 PM, Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net> wrote: > I think I found a reason why POSTing to an LDPR as an APPEND is not as > useful as one > might have thought. (I know the issue is closed but until now I thought it > was one > of those issues that could be re-opened) > > An advantage of POSTing a graph to an LDPR as an append operation would > have been > that it could take care of SPARQL UPDATE's INSERT DATA method easily, and > could have > removed the need for it. There are good reasons one could have for only > allowing > addition of triples, never removing triples. > > LDPR doesn't prevent this, POST is undefined on LDPR. > But then one has the problem of how one would append triples to an LDPC. > One still > seems to need PATCH for that. > > Yes, PATCH seems like the right choice. > Or are there very good reasons for why one should really never append > triples to an > LDPC? > Never append triples? We don't prevent that. Honestly I'm not sure what you are pointing out is against what the spec recommends (or remains silent). It sounds like everything you want to do is allowed. - Steve Speicher > Henry > > Social Web Architect > http://bblfish.net/ > > >
Received on Tuesday, 9 July 2013 00:18:14 UTC