W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > January to March 2004

RE: Use case: Find the email address of "John Smith"

From: Seaborne, Andy <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 13:00:58 -0000
Message-ID: <E864E95CB35C1C46B72FEA0626A2E80801EA18CF@0-mail-br1.hpl.hp.com>
To: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Cc: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>

-------- Original Message --------
> From: Patrick Stickler <mailto:patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
> Date: 24 March 2004 11:31
> On Mar 24, 2004, at 12:13, ext Seaborne, Andy wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > LDAP: Assumes a planned deployment.  And my address book is an RDF
> > file, not a RDF-fronted LDAP server.
> I think it would be useful if we presume that the target of any
> particular query (or query exchange between client and server)
> is an RDF graph.

Agreed - that was my point.  I will make it clearer in a revised text - good
to point out that it is not just a matter of results in RDF or someother
aspect that makes in "RDF query".


> How that RDF graph is realized should be irrelevant to our
> specifications.
> It could be an RDF/XML instance, a native RDF triples store, an RDF
> interface to a RDBMS or LDAP server, a student/slave chained to a
> workstation/terminal, whatever.
> While it will be the case that real-world scenarios will have to
> deal with how those RDF graphs are realized, that shouldn't IMO
> affect our requirements or resulting recommendation, and the less
> we talk about underlying machinery that should be below the line
> of opacity, the better (presuming we all agree where that line
> should be drawn, of course ;-)
> Patrick
Received on Thursday, 25 March 2004 02:37:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:00:24 UTC