Re: [ISSUE-32] Implications of updates on protocol, regarding HTTP methods from Kendall Clark on 2009-07-29 (public-rdf-dawg@w3.org from July to September 2009)

From: Kendall Clark <kendall@clarkparsia.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 15:35:01 -0400
To: Paul Gearon <gearon@ieee.org>
Cc: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
Message-ID: <1fc9c2ff0907291235l2af25c03p51469f42faac6d77@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 3:13 PM, Paul Gearon<gearon@ieee.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 2:04 PM, Kendall Clark<kendall@clarkparsia.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 2:47 PM, Paul Gearon<gearon@ieee.org> wrote:
>>>  Hopefully, the inclusion of the REST-style interface will go
>>> some way to mollifying those people you're referring to.
>>
>> No, my point is that Option 2 will *not* be seen as REST-style by some people.
>
> But that's the point. This is to allow for SPARQL/Update interface to
> have an HTTP binding. This is *not* a REST interface - intentionally
> so.

Ah, yes, then forgive me for misunderstanding.

Cheers,
Kendall

Received on Wednesday, 29 July 2009 19:36:03 UTC