- From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
- Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 12:02:33 +0000
- To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@talis.com>
- Cc: Paul Gearon <gearon@ieee.org>, SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On 11 Jan 2010, at 11:57, Andy Seaborne wrote: >>> 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. > > I was assuming that also. It's that every (multi-operation) > sequence now needs to have ";"s when the syntax issue is confined to > the abbreviated short form of DELETE that strikes me as not ideal. Well, the cost is that you have to type a ";", but the advantage it should be clearer to users what the expression means. I don't really see that as a significant cost. Alternatives involving scoping brackets or similar require more complex syntactic structures, and affect even single expressions. > I also think that multiple operations in one request will not be > uncommon. Basic data loading might be commonly one operation > although surely much of the need for SPARQL Update Language is for > those operations not done by the HTTP update style. It will include > things like ensuring graphs exist before other operations happen. I agree, I'd expect multiple operations to be fairly common. - Steve
Received on Monday, 11 January 2010 12:04:13 UTC