W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > October 2001

RE: RDFCore Update

From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2001 20:11:58 +0300
Message-ID: <2BF0AD29BC31FE46B788773211440431621620@trebe003.NOE.Nokia.com>
To: sandro@w3.org
Cc: geoff@sover.net, bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com, www-rdf-interest@w3.org

> -----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.


Received on Friday, 19 October 2001 13:12:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:52 GMT