- From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@talis.com>
- Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 15:05:14 +0000
- To: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
- CC: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On 12/02/2010 2:33 PM, Axel Polleres wrote: > Thanks Andy for the summary/clarifications... > > On 12 Feb 2010, at 14:23, Andy Seaborne wrote: > >> So our problem is that we have not documented the current working design >> yet. Let me risk doing so: Paul - is this right? >> >> >> One short form: >> >> DELETE WHERE { quadTemplate } >> >> where quadTemplate is a construct-like tripleTemplate or GRAPH<g> { >> tripleTemplate or a mixture. >> >> GRAPH ?g {..} is also legal. >> >> Triples refer to the default graph. > > > The current WD [1] has > > DELETE { quadTemplate } > > as the short form, that is, the WHERE clause is optional... > ... and right, no short form for INSERT necessary. > > Axel > > 1. http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-sparql11-update-20100126/ Sec 4.1.4 "Note: The syntax of this operation can be ambiguous when juxtaposed with INSERT/DELETE. Alternatives are to include an optional semicolon at the end of each operation, and to change this operation to "DELETE WHERE". This is under active discussion." Sec 4.1.5 discusses short form INSERT but I believe that is not up-to-date with the discussions. "If no WHERE clause is present, then the pattern will be matched in the same way" http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JanMar/0163.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JanMar/0129.html Andy
Received on Friday, 12 February 2010 15:05:44 UTC