- From: Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>
- Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2011 09:55:21 -0500
- To: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
- CC: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
That would be great. Please just let Greg and me know when you've added it, so we can avoid any conflicts should we be editing the doc too (hah. :-( ) Lee On 1/24/2011 9:09 AM, Steve Harris wrote: > OK, that's great then. My memory is not that good! > > I'll volunteer to add an example to protocol-1.1 doc if that helps. > > Thanks, > Steve > > On 2011-01-24, at 14:06, Lee Feigenbaum wrote: > >> We did discuss this at some point and I believe there was a consensus >> that it ought to be "update". >> >> Lee >> >> >> On 1/24/11, Steve Harris<steve.harris@garlik.com> wrote: >>> From what I remember from the protocol telecon, there will be two methods, >>> one is x-www-form-urlencoded: >>> >>> POST /update/test HTTP/1.1 >>> Host: localhost:8888 >>> Accept: text/plain >>> Content-Length: 62 >>> Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded >>> >>> [???]=INSERT%20DATA%20%7B%20%3Ca%3E%20%3Cp%3E%20%3Cb%3E%20%7D >>> >>> but what should [???] be? >>> >>> FWIW, 4store uses "update", and 5store uses "query" - hedging our bets :) >>> >>> I'm working on some cross-store client code at the moment, and it's a bit of >>> a blocker. I have no particular preference, but would like a decision one >>> way or the other. >>> >>> - 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 Monday, 24 January 2011 14:55:59 UTC