Hey Jakob Thanks for the feedback, some comments inline:
On 8/20/13 7:29 AM, "Jakob Frank" <ja...@apache.org> wrote: >Hi Andy, all > >I had a quick look through the document - and overall I like the clean >and simple approach of the proposed format. > >Here are my first comments: >- HTTP PATCH targets a resource - IMHO it should be allowed that the >server limits changes to this addressed resource. (the illustrative >example in the doc modifies two resources) It depends what the resource identifies, the HTTP resource could easily be a SPARQL Graph store in which case modifying multiple different RDF resources is perfectly fine IMO. Possibly making this a MAY constraint in the specification would make sense. > >- if you continue the resource-centered approach, you could allow to >skip the subject in the patch file. (but then: how to distinguish >between POC and SPO statements?) Interesting thought, though I think we likely want to allow modifying many resources per my above comment so having this mechanism doesn't necessarily make sense. If we did this to avoid the triple/quad distinction we would need to properly put some up front definition > >- what about allowing wildcards for deletion? e.g. >D <http://example/bob> foaf:name ?x . >to delete all foaf:names for ex:bob This makes the language more query like, the intention was very much to just stream a set of specific changes not to be able to express more update language style constructs. > >- is the ordering of the statements significant? i.e. what is the >result of the following patch: >D <http://example/s> <http://example/p> <http://example/o> . >A <http://example/s> <http://example/p> <http://example/o> . >is it different to the result of >A <http://example/s> <http://example/p> <http://example/o> . >D <http://example/s> <http://example/p> <http://example/o> . Yes the ordering is significant, it is a streaming format by design so changes MUST be processed in order. Thanks, Rob ps. cc'd d...@jena.apache.org so people interested there can also see your feedback > > >Best, >Jakob > >On 12 August 2013 11:23, Andy Seaborne <a...@apache.org> wrote: >> On 11/08/13 18:07, Andy Seaborne wrote: >>> >>> Rob, all, >> >> >> Wrong dev@ :-( >> >> But your welcome to comment and make suggestions :-) >> >> The doc is: >> >> http://afs.github.io/rdf-patch/ >> >> Andy >> >> >>> >>> I've made some changes : I've moved the discussion of features to an >>> appendix and added some possibilities for some of these items. >>> >>> http://afs.github.io/rdf-patch/#notes >>> >>> A.1 Line Mode >>> A.2 Metadata >>> A.2.1 Linking >>> A.2.2 Inline >>> A.3 Transaction Boundaries >>> A.4 Alternative Blank Node Syntax >>> A.5 Alignment Errors >>> A.6 Binary Format >>> >>> - - - - - >>> >>> Prompted by >>> https://twitter.com/pdxleif/status/366267325818736640 >>> >>> Where should we encourage discussion in going to a wider audience? >>> >>> One possibility is github, using the issues area of the git repo . But >>> you have to know where to look and the semweb world is still quite >>> mailing-list driven. >>> >>> public-sparql-...@w3.org makes some sense (it's not a high volume >>>list). >>> Other more general lists like semantic-...@w3.org have their pros and >>> cons. >>> >>> Andy >> >>
