- From: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
- Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2010 23:31:33 +0000
- To: Ian Davis <lists@iandavis.com>
- Cc: nathan@webr3.org, Antoine Zimmermann <antoine.zimmermann@insa-lyon.fr>, public-lod@w3.org
On Sat, 6 Nov 2010 12:33:34 +0000
Ian Davis <lists@iandavis.com> wrote:
> On a practical level using frags can be inefficient when your linked
> data output is backed by a triple store. If you use a slash URI then
> generating the data for html/xml/turtle output is just a simple
> "describe <uri>". For hash URIs you need to describe all the resources
> with a common prefix because the fragment is not sent by the browser
> with the request. That might mean a filter with a regex or string
> functions which will be more inefficient.
Not necessarily. If you take your ex:isDescribedBy predicate and add
that to a triple store where the non-Information-Resource resources are
identified using hash URIs, then the SPARQL query is just:
DESCRIBE <uri> ?res
WHERE { ?res ex:isDescribedBy <uri> . }
which needn't be very slow.
> The other downside of fragments is you can't say "it exists but I have
> no description of it".
<#foo> a rdfs:Resource .
--
Toby A Inkster
<mailto:mail@tobyinkster.co.uk>
<http://tobyinkster.co.uk>
Received on Saturday, 6 November 2010 23:32:09 UTC