RE: Editorial suggestion for CREATE operation

I am satisfied with the new wording.  My comments DB-21, DB-22, and
DB-23, as per http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Comments have been
fully addressed.

Thanks!
David


On Wed, 2012-05-16 at 09:17 +0200, Polleres, Axel wrote:
> Dear David,
> 
> > No, I think that wording still needs to be corrected, because 
> > the sentence does not limit that clause to the case of empty 
> > graphs.  I suggest qualifying that clause as follows:
> > [[
> > Since (non graph-aware) Graph Stores may remove graphs that 
> > are left empty, for such Graph Stores any CreateOperation 
> > performed on an empty or non-existent graph may be viewed as 
> > implicitly immediately followed by a DropOperation (see next 
> > subsection), or simply as an operation with no effect.
> > ]]
> 
> Thanks, I have taken your suggested wording into account 
> as an editorial change reflected in the current Editors' Draft at:
> 
>  http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/update-1.1/Overview.xml
> 
> Additionally, I also made a clarifying edit to the similar 
> note on the ClearOperation, by changing
> 
> ----------------------
> Since (non graph-aware) Graph Stores may remove graphs that are left empty, for such Graph Stores any ClearOperation may be viewed as immediately followed by a DropOperation, see below.
> ----------------------
> 
> to 
> 
> ---------------------- 
> Since (non graph-aware) Graph Stores may remove graphs that are left empty, for such Graph Stores any ClearOperation performed on a named graph may be viewed as immediately followed by a DropOperation, see below. 
> ----------------------
> 
> Please let us know whether this response Addresses/clarifies your 
> concern.
> 
> Axel
> 

-- 
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 Wednesday, 16 May 2012 17:44:59 UTC