W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > July 2010

Re: Subjects as Literals

From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 22:14:07 -0500
Cc: Hugh Glaser <hg@ecs.soton.ac.uk>, Ross Singer <rossfsinger@gmail.com>, Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>, Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
Message-Id: <F7C37978-B4A3-4A10-85BF-DEE04CC72394@ihmc.us>
To: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>

On Jul 1, 2010, at 5:34 AM, Steve Harris wrote:

> On 2010-07-01, at 03:20, Hugh Glaser wrote:
>> In fact, a question I would like to ask, but suspect that noone who  
>> can
>> answer it is still reading this thread ( :-) ):
>> For those who implement RDF stores, do you have to do something  
>> special to
>> reject RDF that has literals as subject?
>
> In my defence, I'm not reading this thread, but someone pointed me  
> at it :)
>
> Yes, and no. The engine will reject any literals in the subject  
> position, the index can't represent that. It's a source of  
> significant optimisations, and we would have to do a /lot/ of  
> engineering work to allow them.
>
> To be brief: I don't care if there are usecases for literals in the  
> subject position. It you could rewind time 10 years I might like  
> them in there, but we've invested millions of pounds in engineering  
> RDF stores conforming to RDF 2004. I can't, and won't throw that  
> work away for some relatively obscure benefits.
>

That is fine. Nobody mandates that your (or anyone else's) software  
must be able to handle all cases of RDF. But to impose an irrational  
limitation on a standard just because someone has spent a lot of money  
is a very bad way to make progress, IMO. Although, I believe that  
there are still people using COBOL, so you may have a point.

Pat Hayes

> - Steve
>
> -- 
> Steve Harris, Garlik Limited
> 1-3 Halford Road, Richmond, TW10 6AW, UK
> +44 20 8439 8203  http://www.garlik.com/
> Registered in England and Wales 535 7233 VAT # 849 0517 11
> Registered office: Thames House, Portsmouth Road, Esher, Surrey,  
> KT10 9AD
>
>
>

------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC                                     (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973
40 South Alcaniz St.           (850)202 4416   office
Pensacola                            (850)202 4440   fax
FL 32502                              (850)291 0667   mobile
phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Friday, 2 July 2010 03:17:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 07:42:20 UTC