- From: Chimezie Ogbuji <chimezie@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 00:39:12 -0500
- To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Cc: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Thanks for suggested text. I was having a problem coming up with a sentence that states that the 'Graph Store Protocol' explicitly applies only to SPARQL 1.1 Graph Stores that didn't seem horribly redundant. I still feel such an explicit sentence doesn't serve any tangible purpose, and the resolution does not require explicit expository language. However, this is not a major point sticking point for me, so I will modify the abstract in the manner that you suggest below. I'm currently without access to my primary laptop for a few days and so unable to address Birte's review and the changes below but hope to be able to do so tomorrow or the day after. On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 2:57 PM, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org> wrote: > This document describes how to use HTTP operations to manage the > RDF graphs stored by a SPARQL 1.1 graph store. This RESTful > interface is an alternative to the SPARQL 1.1 Update protocol. > Most of the operations defined here can be performed using that > interface, but for some clients or servers, this interface may > be easier to implement or work with. This specification may > serve as a suggestion but it not normative for HTTP operations > on RDF graphs which are managed outside of a SPARQL 1.1 graph > store. > > ... and maybe also work that last sentence (or something like it) into > the introduction. > > -- Sandro > >
Received on Tuesday, 14 February 2012 05:39:59 UTC