- From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 14:55:40 +0100
- To: RDF-WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
On 27/06/11 19:55, Jeremy Carroll wrote: > > This is the use case that TopQuadrant has internally that prompted > discussion between me and Gavin leading to this thread on this mailing > list. > > A significant portion of our product source is in RDF. > We are migrating our version control system to GIT to reduce cost of > merging > This will not work for RDF in the form that we currently store it, > because simple changes result in completely different documents > We are now working on a version of my earlier paper with additional > steps to insure reasonable stability of blank node IDs. > > (In the terms of the paper the bnode ids will be based on a hashcode > generated from the first distinctive triple for that bnode). I'm curious - why not store skolemized data? The skolemization URI could record sufficient information related to when the bNode id was first created. It's then fully reversible in syntax terms (with a little parser processing "deskolemization") to make bNodes reconstructable. For me, this is the point of skolemization - finding a bNode again need not be just across the web; it can also be temporally across serialized data. Andy > This will then give, in the vast majority of cases, small changes to the > RDF will result in small changes to the canonical form (larger changes > will occur at discontinuities in the hashing algorithm, when the number > of buckets need expanding) > > Jeremy > >
Received on Tuesday, 28 June 2011 13:56:20 UTC