W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > January 2000

Re: RDF parsing without the building the SiRPAC model

From: <uche.ogbuji@fourthought.com>
Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2000 14:00:08 -0700
Message-Id: <200001032100.OAA12649@localhost.localdomain>
To: Stefan Haustein <stefan.haustein@trantor.de>
cc: rdf-interest <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
> Hello!
> 
> I would like to make a suggestion for improvement of the SiRPAC API. In
> my opinion, the parsing process and the RDF data model should be two
> clearly sperated layers, similar to SAX and DOM. Currently, SiRPAC
> always builds its own internal model, even if I register my own
> RDFConsumer.
> 
> A cleaner approach could be to have a parser and a sparate model
> builder. The model builder could get the parsing events by registering
> itself to a parser.
> 
> Further problems I have with SiRPAC are:

[snip]

> 2. RDFnode should be renamed to RDFNode for consistency.

[snip]

Actually, there is no reason for the "RDF" prefix at all.  It is already in 
package "rdf", and that is all the dismbiguation that should be needed.  It 
should just be called "Node".

I too looked to the SiRPAC effort, in my case to try to re-use an existing 
interface for RDF, but I disliked their interface so much that we're rolling 
our own for our Python RDF processor.  As soon as I have time, I'll post the 
whole catalog of problems I have with the SiRPAC folks' proposed standard RDF 
interface.

-- 
Uche Ogbuji
FourThought LLC, IT Consultants
uche.ogbuji@fourthought.com	(970)481-0805
Software engineering, project management, Intranets and Extranets
http://FourThought.com		http://OpenTechnology.org
Received on Monday, 3 January 2000 16:00:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:42 GMT