- From: Seaborne, Andy <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
- Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 13:00:58 -0000
- 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". Andy > > 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