W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > January 2010

Re: Requirements for a possible "RDF 2.0"

From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 22:06:43 +0000
Cc: jeremy@topquadrant.com, tai@g5n.co.uk, "semantic-web@w3.org" <semantic-web@w3.org>
Message-Id: <31D71711-C12A-4CCC-B2EA-03F42AC3029F@garlik.com>
To: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
On 15 Jan 2010, at 10:57, Danny Ayers wrote:

> Jeremy, Toby, anyone,
>
>
> Aside from a little  tidiness, what would we actually gain through
> going the whole hog on what can go in which position in the triple?
>
> blank node predicate - what does that tell you that an rdfs:seeAlso  
> wouldn't?
>
> literal subject - aside from quotations:
>
> "I can't really see how it would be useful" <x:saidBy> <#me> .

:)

There is a cost to opening up what can go where in triples. My SPARQL  
engines (and I expect those of others) use this as a source of  
optimisations. E.g. if some variable appears in the predicate slot,  
then you know it can only bind to a URI, and you can limit your search  
space.

Not that it's necessarily a bad idea, just that it's not a free lunch.

- Steve

-- 
Steve Harris, Garlik Limited
2 Sheen Road, Richmond, TW9 1AE, UK
+44 20 8973 2465  http://www.garlik.com/
Registered in England and Wales 535 7233 VAT # 849 0517 11
Registered office: Thames House, Portsmouth Road, Esher, Surrey, KT10  
9AD
Received on Friday, 15 January 2010 22:12:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:48:05 UTC