Re: [ACTION-33] Trying to sort the SPARQL/Update issues.

On Wednesday 27 May 2009 13:14:44 Seaborne, Andy wrote:
> I am now more convinced that just HTTP is insufficient because (a) in
> practice, there isn't always an HTTP server and (b) some operations are
> very painful to fit into this style (e.g. DELETE by pattern).


> I didn't hear strong support for phasing the work because several people
> want graph stores, not single graphs, to be updateable.

Well, I think there is strong support for updating either all graphs, or a 
named graph, but have anyone come forward with a case for updating more than 
one named graph in a single query?

I think INSERT INTO <uri> is very important, but I don't know if there needs 
to be support for multiple graphs.

> I have been trying to find groups of operations so we can be clear about
> what does what:
> Tentative suggestion:
> 1/ Graph store management: Create/removal of graphs (names of graphs) from
> the graph store.
> 2/ Whole graph operation (graph exists - may have implicit create/delete):
> clear, replace contents
> 3/ Changes to (nameable) graph: load data into (add triples), delete data,
> insert data, delete by pattern, insert by pattern (this seems less
> significant)

Good. Also, HTTP protocol use, I don't to what extent we should view that as 

Kind regards 

Kjetil Kjernsmo
Senior Knowledge Engineer / SPARQL F&R Editor
Mobile: +47 986 48 234


Computas AS  PO Box 482, N-1327 Lysaker | Phone:+47 6783 1000 | Fax:+47 6783 

Received on Wednesday, 27 May 2009 13:36:22 UTC