Sparse rdf:List and rdf:Seq Graphs

I did some chicken-scratch calculations on the density [1] of a basic rdf:List
and rdf:Seq (i.e. rdfs:Collection subclasses) graph.  Say that we represent
each rdf statement as subgraph with three vertices and two edges like so:

Subject -- Predicate -- Object

Each predicate is considered a different node even if they have the same URI
Ref, with one exception.  For a rdf:List I made the assumption that each
rdf:List instance connects to the same rdf:type->rdf:List subgraph like so:

_:node1 -- rdf:type -- rdf:List
              |
_:node2 ------|
              |
_:node3 ------|

I figure that's an obvious optimization for rdf:List instances.

Well, as a result of my calculations I found that a rdf:Seq of 62 items or more
would be sparse, while a rdf:List of 21 items or more is sparse.  Is that
correct?  Is that one reason for the existance of rdf:List in RDF?  Is it
common to have rdf:List and rdf:Seq graphs that big?  And in general, what kind
of RDF graphs are sparse?

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adjacency_matrix


--
Jimmy Cerra
https://nemo.dev.java.net


		
__________________________________ 
Discover Yahoo! 
Get on-the-go sports scores, stock quotes, news and more. Check it out! 
http://discover.yahoo.com/mobile.html