RE: ISSUE-47: Is MODIFY syntax required?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: []
> On Behalf Of Kjetil Kjernsmo
> Sent: 20 October 2009 15:36
> To:
> Subject: Re: ISSUE-47: Is MODIFY syntax required?
> On Tuesday 20. October 2009 16:29:14 Paul Gearon wrote:
> > While I agree that it's often intuitive to think of "changing a
> > triple", the fact is that RDF statements either exist, or they don't.
> Yeah, that's true!
> > This is just a roundabout way of saying that I don't want to see a
> > concession to the view of changing a triple. Yes, it meets some
> > people's (incorrect) expectations, but it goes against the
> > expectations of everyone who knows what's really going on. Isn't
> > better documentation the correct solution here?
> I don't know. The actual problem here is the not whats actually happening,
> the problem is the additional typing or complexity in writing programs to
> write queries, especially when it is seemingly redundant. This is what the
> majority of users care about, I would claim.

While I agree with Paul that the correct POV is not to change a triple but remove and insert, I'd like to understand what you propose it could look like.  Is it a shortform of a more general operation like MODIFY?


> Kjetil
> --
> Kjetil Kjernsmo

Received on Thursday, 22 October 2009 14:46:10 UTC