- From: Gregory Williams <greg@evilfunhouse.com>
- Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2012 12:50:21 -0800
- To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Cc: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On Jan 6, 2012, at 12:43 PM, Sandro Hawke wrote: > We debated that, but Eric and I, reading 2616 felt like it made sense to > name it after the class of resources called out in the spec, which uses > the term "append". Of course, for RDF, Append means Merge, but we were > thinking the RDF case doesn't need it's own name for this. Well… My point was that for RDF, it needn't mean merge. I can imagine a trivial service that actually did append n-triples or turtle content, which would yield a non-merge w.r.t. any shared blank node IDs in the POSTed content and the resource being POSTed to. .greg
Received on Friday, 6 January 2012 20:50:48 UTC