Re: Non- and Partial-FRBR Metadata

On 9/16/10 3:48 PM, Ross Singer wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 6:45 AM, Antoine Isaac<aisaac@few.vu.nl>  wrote:
>> Btw could we use RDF blank nodes as an alternative here? That would bring no
>> extra URI, and *if you think you need it*, the ability to have these FRBR
>> statements that link the W and the M (and thus to access one from another) .
>>
> Yeah, I think this could be a great way to work around the problem.
> My only concern (not necessarily based in any facts or evidence, mind
> you) might be an impact it might have on SPARQL.  If it doesn't affect
> SPARQLing too adversely, I'd say it's a winner.
>


I think the complexity of the SPARQL queries would be the same. What makes the SPARQL query complex (in terms of graph patterns) is the properties you use in the graph patterns (thus, the number of edges)---not whether the nodes are blank nodes or "fully fledged" resources.

Antoine

Received on Sunday, 19 September 2010 18:35:02 UTC