Mailing-List: contact dev-help@clerezza.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@clerezza.apache.org
Received-SPF: error (athena.apache.org: local policy)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CALvhUEVkTmaV+3QA-H7fSHpjkP2fE6=16gZd-aotxnHVor7r-g@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CALvhUEVkTmaV+3QA-H7fSHpjkP2fE6=16gZd-aotxnHVor7r-g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 06:03:06 +0200
Message-ID: 
 <CAOzb7FKnw0hZdJvxWYNUhJtev5Bf8qs6mj+Xcam0i6GSBdNp0w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Sparql: handle queries and update requests together or
 separately?
From: Hasan Hasan <hasan@trialox.org>
To: dev@clerezza.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf3079bcb6c558bd04e1ad2bf0

--20cf3079bcb6c558bd04e1ad2bf0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Reto


On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 4:55 PM, Reto Bachmann-Gm=FCr <reto@apache.org> wro=
te:

> Hi,
>
> The recent changes towards full sparql 1.1 treat queries and update
> requests together. That is we have one method that accepts both.


Do you mean HTTP method?


> I'm
> wondering if this makes sense. One reason against this approach is
> that the Sparql protocol mandates different ways for submitting
> queries and update requests.


If HTTP method is meant here, I can only find by quickly run through the
doc
http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/REC-sparql11-protocol-20130321/#protocol

that we may want to use HTTP Get for the query and POST for the update.


> But if in clerezza queries end up being
> handled by a method than is also capable of updates it would be hard
> to enforce that no update comes in disguise of a query. (Not that this
> would be a security issue, but it would be against standard and best
> practices to update a graph on a get request).
>

If that is the case, I think we can add or modify function in the preparser
to get
information about whether it is an update or query, and react accordingly.

Cheers
Hasan

>
> Cheers,
> Reto
>

--20cf3079bcb6c558bd04e1ad2bf0--