- From: Xiaoshu Wang <wangxiao@musc.edu>
- Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 09:13:53 -0400
- To: "'Danny Ayers'" <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
- Cc: <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>, "'Semantic Web'" <semantic-web@w3.org>
--Danny, > That sounds like a "slippery slope" argument. I'm not > suggesting an XPath cookie, just something specifically to > enable useful RDF graph partitioning. I agree with your concern. Big RDF document is a big problem and must find a way to resolve it. But I think, first, the ontology designer should think of how to partition their content. Not only for the sake of network bandwidth but also the ontology sharing, reuse and evolution. Second, the semantic cookies can be conviniently solved at the RDF level. For instance, if I have ontology with three partitions or closures. My ontology could easily be deployed something like this: <> closure:type1 uri1 ; closure:type2 uri2 ; closure:type3 uri3 ; etc... With closure:typeN being a rdfs:subPropertyof owl:import. Hence, when a client retrieve this set of RDF, it can decide according to the hypothetical closure ontology. Wouldn't this a much convinient and clean way to solve your problem? Hmm... maybe, we should do this and develop this closure ontology? I will definetly start chewing about it. If anyone interested, let me know. Cheers, Xiaoshu
Received on Tuesday, 25 July 2006 13:15:15 UTC