- From: Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>
- Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 05:58:54 -0400
- To: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
This discharges my action to associate the UpdateIssues wiki page with tracker issues (http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/actions/70). All of the update issues that we had already opened in tracker are now listed on the wiki page. All of issues listed on the wiki page have corresponding tracker issues, except: * Can a SELECT and an INSERT be done in the same query? If so, it seems we throw away the security benefit of having a separate query and update language. I think this is covered by the protocol discussion around having separate endpoints for query vs. update. (Related to Chime's mail of http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2009JulSep/0141.html and the telecon discussion of http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-08-04#Update_via_SPARQL__2f_Protocol .) * Is MODIFY syntax required? * Is DELETE too verbose? These seem like decisions that must be made but not issues worth tracking on their own. * Can INSERTS, DELETES, and other 'subupdates' be nested inside SELECT queries? * Can INSERTS, DELETES, and other 'subupdates' be nested inside update language queries? I don't understand what these would mean, so I wonder if they are actually real issues? Lee
Received on Monday, 31 August 2009 09:59:42 UTC