- From: William Waites <wwaites@tardis.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2018 01:09:51 +0000
- To: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
- Cc: semantic-web@w3.org
> Have you tried to express your use case in SPARQL? Yes, and that would be possible in principle but with a very verbose and not very pretty query and a heck of a lot of post-processing (or maybe some extension to SPARQL that enables randomisation of results in specific ways, but I can’t think right now what that would look like). I don’t want to side-track the discussion with the details of the use case, but it’s very nice to be able to write, ([ a Operator ] [ a Promoter ] [ a CodingSequence ] [ a Terminator ]) and have that mean exactly what it says. It’s a partially specified gene fragment. It’s actually hard to think of a more succinct way of writing it. Expecting people to jump through hoops to write something different from what they mean increases friction unnecessarily. Also, RDF lists increase friction any way you cut it, but that’s for an email with a different Subject header. Cheers, -w
Received on Friday, 23 November 2018 01:10:21 UTC