- From: Barry Norton <barry.norton@ontotext.com>
- Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 10:15:23 +0100
- To: public-lod@w3.org
Sure. But I think it's a little unfair to the specification when, unlike SPARQL-by-GET there is no requirement for a graph or any other constructed parameter. Barry On 22/04/13 09:54, Leigh Dodds wrote: > Hi Barry, > > On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 9:17 AM, Barry Norton <barry.norton@ontotext.com> wrote: >> I'm sorry, but you seem to have misunderstood the use of a graph URI >> parameter in indirect graph addressing for GSP. >> >> I wish all GSP actions addressed graphs directly, Queries were all GETs, and >> that Updates were all PATCH documents, but a degree of pragmatism has been >> applied. > I think Mark's point was that SPARQL 1.1/GSP specify a fixed query > parameter (query, graph) in the specification, requiring clients to > construct URIs rather than using hypermedia. > > Cheers, > > L. > > -- > Leigh Dodds > Freelance Technologist > Open Data, Linked Data Geek > t: @ldodds > w: ldodds.com > e: leigh@ldodds.com >
Received on Monday, 22 April 2013 09:15:47 UTC