- From: Paul Gearon <gearon@ieee.org>
- Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2010 10:05:15 -0500
- To: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Hi all, Axel asked me to post the remaining issues for Update. The top issues from my perspective are: - DELETE syntax is ambiguous. should statements be separable with optional semicolons? Or is another syntax option better? This was discussed, but I wasn't clear on the outcome. - ISSUE-20. Are there differences between an empty graph and a non-existent graph? I like to think so, but didn't see a consensus. This issue affects the need for CREATE and DROP graph operations, and controls whether or not INSERT/DELETE control graph existence. - Are blank nodes permissible in the template for DELETE? There was some discussion, but if there was a resolution then I missed it. - ISSUE-51. Shall dataset clauses be allowed in SPARQL/Update? This is one Lee raised, so he should have good comments on it. This is also one of those areas where new syntax has been proposed that I think makes sense. The remaining issues: - We need the grammar defined. That depends heavily on the above issues. - ISSUE-28. What happens if entailed triples are DELETEd? I presume this is equivalent to an no-op, but there is no resolution recorded. - ISSUE-37. How does basic federated query interact with SPARQL/Update? Personally I don't see the problem, but the issue is still listed as open. - We need a definition of SPARQL Update requests. - ISSUE-26. How far do we go with transactions/atomicity? - ISSUE-18. Are there concurrency issues to be addressed? - Need a mention of what happens when a document is only partially loaded. - Need to discuss the implications (or limits) of the CLEAR command on the default graph on services that form the default from a union of other graphs. - ISSUE-19. What are the security issues around SPARQL Update? Regards, Paul Gearon
Received on Tuesday, 16 February 2010 15:05:50 UTC