- From: Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>
- Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 09:11:05 +0100
- To: "Sean B. Palmer" <sean@mysterylights.com>, <www-rdf-rules@w3.org>
I'd be interested to hear how you think an RDF Path language differs from the simple RDF query proposals that have been circulating. To my mind, the simplicity of RDF's syntactic model, and its close relationship to its data representation framework, doesn't leave a lot of room for distinction between these ideas. (Roughly, I'm thinking of *Path as a selector that operates closely on the syntax to which it is applied, where *Query abstracts away somewhat to access (at some level) the information thus encoded.) #g -- At 03:39 04/09/03 +0100, Sean B. Palmer wrote: >I wanted to implement an RDF Path language in an API that I'm working >on, but current proposals have some serious problems, which generally >fall into two groups: unclear data model, and conflation of arcs and >nodes. > >To that end, I've been working on an RDF Path language that doesn't >have these problems. > > http://infomesh.net/2003/rdfpath/ > - Pondering RDF Path > >The goal is implementability. Feedback is most welcome, noting, >however, that it's still in its early stages. > >Cheers, > >-- >Sean B. Palmer, <http://purl.org/net/sbp/> >"phenomicity by the bucketful" - http://miscoranda.com/ ------------ Graham Klyne GK@NineByNine.org
Received on Thursday, 4 September 2003 04:33:53 UTC