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

Re: Orthogonal triples

From: Alberto Reggiori <alberto.reggiori@jrc.it>
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2000 00:29:43 +0100
Message-Id: <975022183.webexpressdV2.2.0@mboxes.jrc.it>
To: "Bill de hÓra" <dehora@acm.org>, <alberto.reggiori@jrc.it>, "RDF.Interest.Group" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>"@mrelay.jrc.it
Bill de hÓra wrote:

>  : Is this idea I got stupid?
> : Isn't reification useful to attach properties to statements as RDF
>  self
>  : is useful to attach arbitrary properties to resources?
>  Yes it is. The issue(s) at hand is how to square the recommendations
>  in the model to solid predictable rdf engines that can inteoperate
>  with each other and to solid abstractions so others can build on
>  these engines. I don't think anyone is arguing we knock off
>  reification, rather just "embrace and clarify".

Well I got my clarification thanks!
Anyway, my implementation is mainly based on the Stanford API and does 
associate an unique ID to 
each statement and represents statements as resources (internally); such 
unique IDs allow me to store 
easily triples in a key/value Berkeley DB and it work like a charm. On 
the other side, the parser generates 
genid(s) for anonymous resources, such the ones of reified statements.
So my Perl code is doing what it is supposed to do, parse, store and run 
I understand that your issues about fixing the spec are of relevance, 
but at the same time I think there are 
people out there like me that are trying to leverage on what the spec 
offers and build something useful 
with it.


Received on Thursday, 23 November 2000 18:29:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:07:33 UTC