- From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
- Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 18:24:58 +0000
- To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@talis.com>
- Cc: Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>, SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On 23 Nov 2009, at 18:01, Andy Seaborne wrote: > On 23/11/2009 17:36, Lee Feigenbaum wrote: >> I'll let Steve speak, but I meant rethink it for SPARQL *Update* - no >> one was proposing changing SPARQL Query's model, since we need to >> ensure >> backwards compatibility. Sorry for any confusion. > > I read it as for SPARQL Update and nothing else :-) > > The query model is embedded in global naming via URIs and in AWWW so > it's a bit out of scope to make changes :-) The default graph bit isn't, as that has no URI. But it's still out of scope for this WG to change that. > There is a big difference with update - the server can now be > responsible for the current, definitive set of data for the graph, > primarily for URIs within it's part of the global namespace but we > have to think through the implications for updates to graphs named > by other parties. Yes, that is quite a complex issue. I remember discussing something around this area with Dave - regarding SPARQL stores as a cache. I don't think that was discussed in the F2F meetings though, so I not don't think that is what Lee was referring to. - 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 Monday, 23 November 2009 18:25:33 UTC