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