Re: Blank nodes and SQL sequences

On 9/7/12 9:50 AM, Sandro Hawke wrote:
> It would be kind of nice to call them "private genids", to parallel 
> public genids and IRIs, but I guess that's too far from tradition.
> But whatever, I can live with the terminology you're using above. 
Take terminology already understood by RDBMS community. As I've stated 
in the past RDBMS terminology alignment is always a gain for RDF.

Ultimately, RDF stores are about unleashing (or unveiling) the nascent 
(at best) intensional dimension of RDBMS technology.

You have "sequences" and its from the SQL spec, as Richards already 
alluded to in his post.

Discussing sequences with an RDBMS savvy audience will cost you nothing, 
doing it in usual blank nodes speak always has the potential to wreck 
your entire discussion.

When all the terminology is lined up, it becomes really easy to 
demonstrate all the problems that RDF solves relative to conventional 
RDBMS challenges. Even the simple dump and reload of data, with RDF in 
the mix, becomes a killer demo.



Kingsley Idehen	
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web:
Personal Weblog:
Twitter/ handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile:
LinkedIn Profile:

Received on Friday, 7 September 2012 14:20:56 UTC