- From: Steve Harris <S.W.Harris@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 15:16:42 +0100
- To: DAWG public list <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 02:05:26 +0100, Seaborne, Andy wrote: > True - but its not that bad: we store namespace prefixes with models and > could use thoese prefixes. Works very well with predicates. Going another > stage, allowing @prefix declarations inline means that the first use > occurrence can be used to declare a prefix. The client and server need to > maintain a prefix map but that does not seem too bad. Thats a good point. > However, the killer is the RDF-ness - information for the first result could > be in the last triple. We could have a restricted syntax this is parsable > as RDF in an existing syntax, but has further restrictions so that it could > be parsed in a streaming mode. Yes. It also has the fact that you still need (most of) an Ntriples parser to hadle the result set, which is quite a burdon, and doesnt really satisfy the "get it out of RDF" aim. - Steve
Received on Wednesday, 2 June 2004 10:16:48 UTC