- From: Seaborne, Andy <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
- Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 14:45:13 +0000
- To: Kjetil Kjernsmo <kjetil@kjernsmo.net>, "public-rdf-dawg@w3.org" <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
> -----Original Message----- > From: public-rdf-dawg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-rdf-dawg-request@w3.org] > On Behalf Of Kjetil Kjernsmo > Sent: 20 October 2009 15:36 > To: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > 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? Andy > > Kjetil > -- > Kjetil Kjernsmo > kjetil@kjernsmo.net > http://www.kjetil.kjernsmo.net/
Received on Thursday, 22 October 2009 14:46:10 UTC