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 document: <rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http:..." xmlns:ex="http://example/vocab#"> <rdf:Description about="http://example/stuff#something"> <ex:title>10</ex:title> <ex:age>10</ex:age> <ex:color>blue</ex:color> <ex:mood>blue</ex:mood> <ex:prop1>100</ex:prop1> <ex:prop2>100</ex:prop2> <ex:prop3>100</ex:prop3> <!-- ... and so on, up to ...--> <ex:prop10000>100</ex:prop10000> </rdf:Description> </rdf:RDF> 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