Re: Requirements for a possible "RDF 2.0"

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  

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
Registered in England and Wales 535 7233 VAT # 849 0517 11
Registered office: Thames House, Portsmouth Road, Esher, Surrey, KT10  

Received on Friday, 15 January 2010 22:12:56 UTC