W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > November 2003

Put/Get (was RE: RDF query and Rules - my two cents)

From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:42:56 -0500
Message-Id: <p05200f0ebbe2e5a84fde@[10.0.1.5]>
To: "Joshua Allen" <joshuaa@microsoft.com>, "Danny Ayers" <danny666@virgilio.it>, "Patrick Stickler (NMP-MSW/Tampere)" <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Cc: "Graham Klyne" <GK@ninebynine.org>, "Dan Brickley" <danbri@w3.org>, <www-rdf-rules@w3.org>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>

At 11:08 AM -0800 11/20/03, Joshua Allen wrote:
>>   But despite the fact that we
>>  > don't even have the slightest freekin' semblance of a consistent
>>  > data-access architecture,
>>
>>  We have the web.
>
>PUT/GET are a data-access architecture for documents, period.  RDF is
>not a document data model; it's a graph data model.  If you want to shim
>a document data model on top of your graph storage, then fine -- but you
>better figure out how to interact with your graph storage first.  Until
>you have a consistent way of accessing your graph data model, you're
>going to have a post-babel chaos.


Sorry, just trying to change the name on this thread now that it no 
longer is really related to the issue of whether to form WGs at this 
time and if so which ones...
-- 
Professor James Hendler			  http://www.cs.umd.edu/users/hendler
Director, Semantic Web and Agent Technologies	  301-405-2696
Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab.	  301-405-6707 (Fax)
Univ of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742	  240-277-3388 (Cell)
Received on Thursday, 20 November 2003 16:43:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:03 GMT