- From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
- Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 15:29:10 +0100
- To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@talis.com>
- Cc: Alexandre Passant <alexandre.passant@deri.org>, SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On 2010-07-13, 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>? I would imagine so. - Steve -- Steve Harris, CTO, Garlik Limited 1-3 Halford Road, Richmond, TW10 6AW, UK +44 20 8439 8203 http://www.garlik.com/ Registered in England and Wales 535 7233 VAT # 849 0517 11 Registered office: Thames House, Portsmouth Road, Esher, Surrey, KT10 9AD
Received on Tuesday, 13 July 2010 14:29:57 UTC