W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > November 2002

RE: why query languages and RDF data have syntaxes?

From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 11:31:27 +0000
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021129113036.03b87080@127.0.0.1>
To: "Seaborne, Andy" <Andy_Seaborne@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: "'jeffzhang726@yahoo.com.cn'" <jeffzhang726@yahoo.com.cn>, "'www-rdf-interest@w3.org'" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>

At 09:30 AM 11/29/02 +0000, Seaborne, Andy wrote:
>I think the query languages you have looked at are trying to address the
>problem of getting information out of an RDF model.  They appeal to the
>common SQL paradigm and provide a programming structure that application
>writers are familiar with.  In particular, the result of a query is a set of
>variable bindings, not a gragh (or set of graphs).  Having such a syntax for
>a query is convenient - building queries as an RDF model in a toolkit of
>your choice is a bit tedious.

Yes, building queries as an RDF model can be tedious, though I do think it 
has some advantages.  That is what I do in my toy query language [1].  I 
find it convenient that there is only one input syntax that my software has 
to deal with, but you're right that the queries can be a bit tedious to 
code.  (I've thought about writing a separate query-to-RDF/N3 compiler ;-)

I entirely agree about the variable binding issue, which is another reason 
that it's not always sufficient to use an RDF example directly as a query.

#g
--

[1] http://www.ninebynine.org/RDFNotes/RDFForLittleLanguages.htm




-------------------
Graham Klyne
<GK@NineByNine.org>
Received on Friday, 29 November 2002 07:51:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:57 GMT