Re: Possible Service Description change

On 19/06/12 15:49, Gregory Williams wrote:
> On Jun 19, 2012, at 6:10 AM, Andy Seaborne wrote:
>
>> In a single update request there may be operations that use
>> USING/USING NAMED and some that do not.  So one operation may use
>> USING/USING NAMED to get a dynamically constructed dataset and the
>> next operation does not use USING* so it can see the results of an
>> earlier operation.
>
> Interesting. I hadn't considered that. This is where we run up
> against the few SD "features" being under specified, I guess. So do
> you think the current wording is acceptable?

It is acceptable -

Tweaking:

"will dereference" -- not sure about "will", it's seems definite that 
will happen, maybe it's a possibility.  But I can't suggest better 
wording, all that I tried seemed worse!

One of:

s/query evaluation/graph pattern evaluation/   (pedantic)
s/query evaluation/query or update evaluation/ (mention update)
s/query evaluation/evaluation/                 (covers any evaluation)

	Andy

>
> thanks, .greg
>
>

Received on Tuesday, 19 June 2012 18:30:36 UTC