- From: Seaborne, Andy <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
- Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 14:05:04 +0000
- To: Gregory Williams <greg@evilfunhouse.com>, Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
- CC: "public-rdf-dawg@w3.org Group" <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
> -----Original Message----- > From: public-rdf-dawg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-rdf-dawg-request@w3.org] > On Behalf Of Gregory Williams > Sent: 16 October 2009 19:03 > To: Steve Harris > Cc: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org Group > Subject: Re: Questions about Update 1.1 > > On Oct 16, 2009, at 11:35 AM, Steve Harris wrote: > > > Yes, agreed. A similar thing happens in 4store, but for different > > reasons. The only promise we make is that if you get a bNode ID out > > in SPARQL results, then you can reuse that ID in <_:$id> until you > > do an update on the graph it came from, at which time it may no > > longer be valid. > > Thinking ahead here a bit, would it be possible for the implementors > of such things to define an IRI representing the logic here? In this > case, I'd like an IRI I could use with sd:feature for "if you get a > bNode ID out in SPARQL results, then you can reuse that ID in <_:$id> > until you do an update on the graph". Obviously this is outside the > scope of the WG, but think it would be great to have such things > earlier rather than later when it comes to explaining the benefits of > service descriptions. +1 to having a URI to name this. > > thanks, > greg >
Received on Sunday, 18 October 2009 14:05:59 UTC