[foaf-dev] [foaf-protocols] fp:ping

[Story Henry]

On 16 Apr 2010, at 15:19, Nathan wrote:

>> Looking at your proposal just makes my point that there is a lot of work to
>> do in this area. From a quick perusal of your solution, it won't work. It may seem
>> to, but that is an illusion, because you only have your own implementation to work in. Semantically though it is wrong. A patch needs to be done as a diff of graphs. It is not something you can do without named graphs. 
> 
> that's what this does; creates a diff then you use that diff to patch X
> graph (using named graphs) and it has some additionals such as merging
> multi graphs together and suchlike - tested and all works nicely. +
> sparql-less. In short it's a full implementation of diff/patch for rdf
> and is being used already (even by Ivan over at virtuoso who's using it
> to test the new virtuoso delta engine)

Ah ok. I see. It is a doing some hidden reification really. I was worried the blank node was a blank node for the subject, which is a natural way to read _:d1 in

-------------------------------------------
@prefix guo: <http://webr3.org/owl/guo#> .
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
@prefix dcterms: <http://purl.org/dc/terms/> .

_:u1
	a guo:UpdateInstruction ;
	rdfs:comment "updated the title and published."@en ;
	dcterms:creator <http://webr3.org/nathan> ;
	dcterms:created "2010-03-18T17:05:01Z" ;
	guo:target_subject <http://webr3.org/r/temp> ;
	guo:delete _:d1 ;
	guo:insert _:i1 .

_:d1 dcterms:title "GUO working"@en .

_:i1 dcterms:title "GUO Spec Initial Release"@en ;
	dcterms:publisher <http://webr3.org/nathan> ;
	dcterms:published "2010-03-18T17:05:01Z" .
-------------------------------------------


I find the SPARUL version easier to read, and conceptually clearer - less likely to
get people to go on to do the wrong thing.

But ok, thanks for pointing this out. Could indeed be useful.

Henry