- From: Martin Hepp \(DERI extern\) <martin.hepp@deri.org>
- Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 18:50:53 +0200
- To: "'Mailing Lists'" <list@thirdstation.com>, <semantic-web@w3.org>
Hi Mark, in my humble opinion, writing the same triple multiple times does not change the state of the triple store. In other words, duplicate triples should not be stored multiple times (there might be implementations that are flawed in this sense). Unless it is encapsulated as a reified statement, a triple does not have an identity of its own. So if one writes the same triple twice and deletes it once afterwards, the triple should no longer exist (*). Martin (*) Unless it can also be deduced, e.g. based on an rdfs:subClassOf relationship. Quite naturally, if you delete an explicit triple, but it is still stored implicitly, it is still there - but that seems obvious to me. --------------------------- martin.hepp@deri.org, phone: +43 512 507 6465 http://www.heppnetz.de / http://www.deri.org -----Original Message----- From: semantic-web-request@w3.org [mailto:semantic-web-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Mailing Lists Sent: Donnerstag, 20. Oktober 2005 18:26 To: semantic-web@w3.org Subject: idempotency of triple stores Hi, If I am dumping data into a triple store and my data ends up having duplicate triples how is a triple store supposed to handle the dupes? For example, if I try to insert these three triples: <isbn:0802130208> <dc:title> <"A Confederacy of Dunces"> <isbn:0802130208> <dc:title> <"A Confederacy of Dunces"> <isbn:0802130208> <dc:title> <"A Confederacy of Dunces"> Will I end up with three triples or one in the triplestore? Is there a specification for how a triple store is supposed to treat this situation or does each follow its own rule? Thanks, Mark .o0 Mark Donoghue .o0 http://hdl.handle.net/10.1570/m.donoghue
Received on Thursday, 20 October 2005 16:51:13 UTC