W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdfa-wg@w3.org > April 2011

Re: ISSUE-93: Should the RDF API support persistent storage?

From: Benjamin Adrian <benjamin.adrian@dfki.de>
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 22:39:19 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <43293.192.168.23.181.1303418359.squirrel@192.168.23.180>
To: public-rdfa-wg@w3.org
What I propose, is just to provide the possibility to define
the persistence strategy in our API explicitly.

e.g.,
rdf.setPersistence(rdf.IN_MEMORY_PERSISTENCE)
rdf.setPersistence(rdf.LOCAL_PERSISTENCE, file)
rdf.setPersistence(rdf.REMOTE_PERSISTENCE, url)

rdf.getPersistence() // returns one of these three strategies

It does not mean, that implementers have to support all three strategies.
But it would developers explicate how the RDF data is stored.


> RDF Web Applications Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
>> ISSUE-93: Should the RDF API support persistent storage?
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/93
>
> from the archives:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2010Nov/0029.html
>
>



-----------------------------------------
This email was sent using SquirrelMail.
   "Webmail for nuts!"
http://squirrelmail.org/
Received on Thursday, 21 April 2011 20:39:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:19:51 UTC