W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > August 2004

Re: Reification - whats best practice?

From: Laurian Gridinoc <laur@gd.ro>
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 09:27:05 +0000
Message-ID: <412DACE9.6060003@gd.ro>
To: Eric Jain <Eric.Jain@isb-sib.ch>
CC: Lars Marius Garshol <larsga@ontopia.net>, rdf-interest <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>

Hello,

I thought that not using contexts was a good point, because I can make 
or verify statements out of any context...
Of course, reification is redundant because there is no way to assign an 
URI to a triple unless the underlying storage supports this, but out of 
the storage context won't work.

Eric Jain wrote:

> [...]
> It would indeed be nice if there was a way to avoid global identifiers 
> for statements, but all syntaxes that I have seen so far that do so 
> end up being rather verbose, i.e. using even more disk space than 
> standard RDF/XML (unless perhaps you need to reify every single 
> statement).


Maybe one solution (global identifiers),  would be to have an URI schema 
for triples, something like urn:rdf:sha1:BASE32ofSHA1SumOfNTriple to 
address a statement in an uniform way (decoupled of any storage internal 
identifiers).

I know it's wrong, but what if?

Cheers,

-- 
Laurian Gridinoc
Chief Developer
GRAPEFRUIT DESIGN

mobile: +40.724.363656
e-mail: laur@gd.ro
www.grapefruitdesign.com
www.gd.ro
Received on Thursday, 26 August 2004 09:27:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:14:57 UTC