W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > September 2007

Re: Triples storage

From: Steve Harris <swh@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 12:59:12 +0100
Message-Id: <FEC585C9-AB1E-450A-BD71-77A9B89C70EF@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Cc: "Semantic Web Interest Group" <semantic-web@w3.org>, "public-owl-dev@w3.org" <public-owl-dev@w3.org>
To: "Emanuele D'Arrigo" <manu3d@gmail.com>

On 26 Sep 2007, at 12:33, Emanuele D'Arrigo wrote:

> On 9/26/07, Renato Golin <renato@ebi.ac.uk> wrote:
>> I'm quite interested in triplet storages but what I found is that  
>> there
>> is no consensus nor standard for anything in that area.
> In hindsight, I believe my question was a bit hopeless: as Arjohn
> says it's unlikely that a consensus will ever develop on the matter.
> There will be various options with pros and cons. My bad. =)
> I guess my question really had to be more in the direction of:
> are there two or three architectures for triplets storage to choose
> from?

I think there are many more than that. Much like with SQL engines,  
there are almost as many sotrage algorithms as products.

>> There are several storage engines but each one doing it's own way.
>> Also, the support to query languages is quite random.
> Indeed I seem to have noticed that. Is the field still so novel
> that there are no full implementation of RQL?
> Yet, the specifications seems to have been stable for some time... =?

No idea, but there are full implementations of SPARQL, and lots of  
more-or-less complete ones.

- Steve
Received on Wednesday, 26 September 2007 11:59:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 08:45:02 UTC