Re: Editorial suggestion for CREATE operation

Sorry, that was actually for DB-21.

On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 15:26 -0400, David Booth wrote:
> Regarding DB-22, I am satisfied with this resolution.
> 
> Thank you,
> David
> 
> ---------------------
> From: Polleres, Axel <axel.polleres@siemens.com>
> Date: Wed, 2 May 2012 08:09:28 +0200
> To: "public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org" <public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org>
> Message-ID:
> <9DA51FFE5E84464082D7A089342DEEE80138CF539998@ATVIES9917WMSX.ww300.siemens.net>
> Hi David,
> 
> Following your suggestion, we have in the latest Editor's draft at
> 
>    http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/update-1.1/Overview.xml#create
> 
> we have changed
> 
> "If the graph already exists, then a failure SHOULD be returned, except
> when the SILENT keyword is used."
> 
> to
> 
> "If the graph already exists, then a failure SHOULD be returned, except
> when the SILENT keyword is used; in either case, the contents of already
> existing graphs remain unchanged."
> 
> 
> We'd appreciate if you could briefly acknowledge that your comment has
> been addressed.
> 
> Axel, on behalf of the SPARQL WG
> 
> 
> 
> > At http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-update/#create
> > I suggest adding the sentence: "If the graph already exists then its
> > content is unchanged."
> >
> >
> > --
> > David Booth, Ph.D.
> > http://dbooth.org/
> >
> > Opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily
> > reflect those of his employer.
> 
> 

-- 
David Booth, Ph.D.
http://dbooth.org/

Opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily
reflect those of his employer.

Received on Friday, 11 May 2012 19:27:55 UTC