- From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
- Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 11:20:49 +0000
- To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@talis.com>
- Cc: Paul Gearon <gearon@ieee.org>, SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On 9 Jan 2010, at 19:17, Andy Seaborne wrote: >>>>> >>>>> That seems visually like two statements to me. Some SQL systems >>>>> use >>>>> ; to >>>>> separate statements too, and it's familiar to programmers of C- >>>>> derived >>>>> languages. >>>> >>>> Makes sense. So do we tack a [ ';' ] to the end of the expression? >> >> Seems good to me. >> >>> Not overloading DELETE would work now we have not got a short-form >>> of >>> INSERT and the multiple use of DELETE and INSERT with one WHERE. >> >> I think I'd find the overloaded form much easier to remember. >> There's no >> particular reason why REMOVE is not allowed to take a WHERE, but >> DELETE is. >> >> It's especially arbitrary around the DELETE WHERE { } syntactic >> shortcut >> as opposed to REMOVE { }. >> >> - Steve > > I think that introducing ";" for all operations because this one > short form needs it is not balanced so I'm keen to find a way to > avoid that necessity. Ah, I was thinking that the last ; would be optional, like . and triples. - Steve
Received on Monday, 11 January 2010 11:21:18 UTC