On 2/27/13 10:37 AM, Steve Harris wrote: > I don't want to throw numbers about, but for us the cost of anything that significantly decreases the efficiency of our RDF storage carries a huge monetary cost - we couldn't justify it without a significant upside. This is a very important point, and from the DBMS engineering perspective it's true. There are costs to existing RDF stores and DBMS engines. A suggestion: Manu: JSON-LD should make a note about the use of bnodes to denote graphs. That note could then hone into its special use case scenarios e.g., where there's high velocity data with little mass. Steve: As already acknowledged above, you are correct about the optimization cost to existing RDF stores and DBMS engines (it will hit Virtuoso too) . Thus, when our engines encounter such data, we could simply just remap the IRIs as part of our data ingestion (insert | import) routines. That's what we'll end up doing. Naturally, this means tweaking existing code re. data import, ingestion, and creation etc.. Personally, I believe we have the ability to close out this matter without holding up the various workgroups i.e., RDF 1.1 stays as is. JSON-LD has a fleshed out version of the note I suggested to Manu etc.. Manu/Steve: What do you think? -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen Founder & CEO OpenLink Software Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
Received on Wednesday, 27 February 2013 16:36:48 UTC