Example 6 - implicit blank nodes

[afs]

Example 6:

PREFIX : <http://www.example.org/>
DELETE DATA
{
  :alice :claims << :bob :age 23 >>.
}

This is fine for RDF-star/CG but for RDF 1.2 there is a blank node because of the << >>.
That makes it bad syntax (https://www.w3.org/TR/sparql12-query/#sparqlGrammar note 9). Even if allowed, the action will not work.

The DELETE needs to capture the blank node in the data.

This works:

PREFIX : <http://www.example.org/>
DELETE WHERE
{
  :alice :claims << :bob :age 23  ~ ?r >>.
}

Original:
https://lists.apache.org/thread/4kz69gv5gy185z6gg5fh1zl63s0nx2rz

[afs]

This came up again -- apache/jena#3883

[rubensworks]

While we could introduce some kind of special translation mechanism that makes the DELETE DATA case work, I think it would cause more confusion than it would solve.

IMO, the best we can do is document that this DELETE DATA case is not allowed, and perhaps even recommend implementations to add a clear error message to use DELETE WHERE instead.

[afs]

No change - I agree.
Just add an example in the document, no more, because RDF-star has an example.