W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > July to September 2005

Re: thoughts from Tuesday telecon

From: Steve Harris <S.W.Harris@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 13:33:43 +0100
To: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20050926123343.GA14226@login.ecs.soton.ac.uk>

On Mon, Sep 26, 2005 at 12:11:29 +0100, Andy Seaborne wrote:
> >My engine allows you to pass in skolemised bnodes as URIs with bad syntax,
> >eg <_:y>, as does Jena I believe, but thats a hack/bug/something.
> 
> I confess - ARQ does allow this.

I haven't yet decided wether I'l allow this by default, in some sort of
useful-but-not-correct mode, or remove support alltogether yet. I'd
welcome your thoughts.
 
> >>(My own view is that none of this redundancy-removal is necessary, 
> >>but I recognize that this does not seem to be the majority view.)
> >
> >I agree with this. The redundancy removal can be done on the client side,
> >so without a really convincing use-case I dont find it a very tempting
> >piece of code to write as an implementor.
> 
> I think the process must be to do told-bnode redundancy removal before 
> applying the algebra for more complicated queries, including some FILTERs, 
> making it servers-die, unfortunately.  The G1/G2/G3 example shows that the 
> removal is dependent on the graph queried and not just the result set, 
> making it a server-side operation.

I would have thought that its possible (in the case where the bnodes
are left skolemised) to determine which bnodes in the output graph are
co-referent in the client. If thier deskolemised in the output then its
certainly a lot harder, if possible at all.

- Steve
Received on Monday, 26 September 2005 12:34:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:24 GMT