W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > February 2002

B5 storage: why did it go away? [was: why S...]

From: Daniel W. Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2002 12:26:15 -0500 (EST)
To: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
cc: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0202051213510.30080-100000@tux.w3.org>
On Tue, 5 Feb 2002, Patrick Stickler wrote:

> On 2002-02-05 1:50, "ext Pat Hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu> wrote:
> >>>> Issue B5: Storage Requirements
> >>>>  ===============================
> >>>>
> >>>>  status: disputed.
> >>>>
> >>>>  TDL requires significantly more storage to implement.
> >>>
> >>> Sergey got back on this one, no? Yup, and then so did Patrick.  So
> >>> far as I know the protagonists still disagree.
> >>
> >> Sergey: does Patricks latest proposal for an implementation strategy
> >> for TDL cause you to withdraw this issue?
> >>
> >
> > I really think this is a non-issue.
> I agree. Though if Sergey still feels this is an issue, I
> would like to understand why the recent posts on this do
> not alleviate it.

I don't understand how this issue went away. Consider this

<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http:..." xmlns:ex="http://example/vocab#">
 <rdf:Description about="http://example/stuff#something">
   <!-- ... and so on, up to ...-->

Assuming S,
I can read that into an RDF store that only has one
object/pointer/cell for "10", one for "blue", and
one for "100". Then I can answer queries like those
found in most popular RDF APIs:

	statementsMatching(wildcard, wildcard, "100")

But if we adopt TDL, how can I do this without
allocateing 10000 cells? There
are interpretations in which each occurence of "abc"
denotes a different value/resource/object, no?

Maybe there's a straightforward answer that I just
don't see. Help?

Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Tuesday, 5 February 2002 12:27:28 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:45:05 EDT