Re: "Microsoft Access" for RDF?

On 19 February 2015 at 11:52, Michael Brunnbauer <brunni@netestate.de>
wrote:

> an interesting aspect of such a system is the ordering of triples - even
> if you restrict editing to one subject. Either the order is predefined and
> the
> user will have to search for his new triple after doing an insert or the
> user
> determines the position of his new triple.
>
> In the latter case, the app developer will want to use something like
> reification - at least internally. This is the point when the app developer
> and the Semantic Web expert start to disagree ;-)
>
> Maybe they can compromise on a system with a separate named graph per
> triple
> (BTW what is the status of blank nodes shared between named graphs?).
>

It would make sense to define UI element order at a higher level than
individual triples. Defining the position for every triple separately would
lead to chaos.

A more sensible approach 'd be to define the order of statements [about
something] at the property level.

E.g. display the most important properties first, then have an ordered list
of other properties that we know are frequently used for this type of
objects and, as fallback, list all other (unknown) properties at the end.

Uldis