- From: Alexandre Passant <alexandre.passant@deri.org>
- Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 15:10:32 +0100
- To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@talis.com>
- Cc: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>, SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On 13 Jul 2010, at 15:02, Andy Seaborne wrote: > > > On 13/07/2010 2:54 PM, Steve Harris wrote: >> On 2010-07-13, at 14:33, Andy Seaborne wrote: >> >> [snip] >> >>>>>>>> Hence, DROP ALL will DROP all graphs, and the system MUST re-create the default one (as an empty graph). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> That would lead to >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> DROP [ SILENT ] GRAPH<uri> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> => >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> DROP [ SILENT ] (GRAPH (<uri> | DEFAULT) | ALL) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> (and DROP GRAPH DEFAULT == CLEAR GRAPH DEFAULT with the previous auto. default-graph creation feature) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Makes sense ? >>>>>> >>>>>> I don't have an opinion whether DROPping the default should be allowed but if it is, meaning "clear" by implicit restoration is OK. >>>> Ok - so based on that and your previous comments re. GRAPH DEFAULT, that could be >>>> >>>> DROP [ SILENT ] (GRAPH<uri> | DEFAULT | ALL) >>>> >>>> and >>>> >>>> CLEAR [ SILENT ] (GRAPH<uri> | DEFAULT | ALL) >>> >>> SILENT? Isn't that only DROP and CREATE? >> >> DROP GRAPH<a> >> DROP GRAPH<a> >> >> gives one or two errors, but >> >> DROP SILENT GRAPH<a> >> DROP SILENT GRAPH<a> > > The grammar suggestion has > > CLEAR SILENT GRAPH <a> > > My question is how can CLEAR be silent (or not silent). > > Is it CLEAR SILENT <a> for non-existent <a>? That's what I have in mind. If the GRAPH does not exist, SILENT is used in a similar way that with DROP, i.e. avoid raising error Alex. > > Andy >> >> gives none. At least if it follows the SQL defn. of SILENT. >> >> - Steve >> -- Dr. Alexandre Passant Digital Enterprise Research Institute National University of Ireland, Galway :me owl:sameAs <http://apassant.net/alex> .
Received on Tuesday, 13 July 2010 14:11:07 UTC