- From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
- Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 13:37:04 -0400
- To: "Seaborne, Andy" <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
- Cc: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On 29 Oct 2009, at 09:52, Seaborne, Andy wrote: > From a recent user report: [1] > > This update request > > DELETE FROM <example:store> { ?s ?p ?o } WHERE { ?s ?p ?o } > > does not clear the graph <example:store> as might be expected from > the DELETE syntax. The pattern matches against the default graph, > not the named graph in the FROM clause but the syntax is confusingto > the point of leading the application writer astray. Ouch, that is confusing. It might be another case where the GRAPH syntax is clearer: DELETE { GRAPH <example:store> { ?s ?p ?o } } WHERE { ?s ?p ?o } which would have the same meaning, but is clearer in my opinion. > This would also matter for a shorthand version: > > DELETE FROM <example:store> { ?s ?p ?o } > > What's the implicit WHERE clause here? Use of GRAPH in the template > might be a bit less confusing but I don't think it is sufficiently so. I think it is at least better: DELETE { GRAPH <example:store> { ?s ?p ?o } } WHERE { GRAPH <example:store> { ?s ?p ?o } } DELETE { ?s ?p ?o } WHERE { GRAPH <example:store> { ?s ?p ?o } } DELETE { GRAPH <example:store> { ?s ?p ?o } } WHERE { ?s ?p ?o } just because the scoping of GRAPH is explicit c.f. FROM. - Steve -- Steve Harris, CTO, Garlik Limited 2 Sheen Road, Richmond, TW9 1AE, UK +44(0)20 8973 2465 http://www.garlik.com/ Registered in England and Wales 535 7233 VAT # 849 0517 11 Registered office: Thames House, Portsmouth Road, Esher, Surrey, KT10 9AD
Received on Thursday, 29 October 2009 17:37:40 UTC