RE: RDFCore Update

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Sandro Hawke [mailto:sandro@w3.org]
> Sent: 19 October, 2001 18:12
> To: Stickler Patrick (NRC/Tampere)
> Cc: geoff@sover.net; bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com; www-rdf-interest@w3.org
> Subject: Re: RDFCore Update 
> 
> 
> 
> > Maybe there is yet a better way. Let's hear suggestions. 
> Though I agree
> > that qualified anonymous nodes is not the optimal way to do it (even
> > despite low memory prices ;-)
> 
> But the difference only matters in the serialization module; the
> internal representation would probably be the same either way.  No
> difference in memory consumed.
> 
>     -- sandro

There would be a difference if typed literals were resources. Not
a big difference, but a difference nonetheless. And a greater 
difference if URVs are left "as-is" and type extracted as needed
on the fly rather than having explicit arcs to data type resources.

Though the compression is, I agree, much more significant in the 
serialization than the graph.

Cheers,

Patrick