W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > March 2011

Re: a blank node issue

From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 11:59:33 +0000
Cc: Jiří Procházka <ojirio@gmail.com>, Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, William Waites <ww@styx.org>, nathan@webr3.org, Ivan Shmakov <oneingray@gmail.com>, semantic-web@w3.org
Message-Id: <0878A74B-BB43-4746-8550-9097A9FBF5F9@cyganiak.de>
To: Reto Bachmann-Gmuer <reto.bachmann@trialox.org>
On 3 Mar 2011, at 07:55, Reto Bachmann-Gmuer wrote:
> I thought the discussion was about how to best use the technologies at hand, not about which technologies are widely deployed.

If features X has been in the spec for seven years and has had no impact on deployments, then it's safe to say that X is not the best way of using the spec.

What have you learned about RDF since 2004?

> I've rarely dealt with RDF applications that do not have mechanisms to prevent or remove redundancies.

Of course, but these mechanisms have nothing to do with blank node leanification.

> Besides creating redundant graphs starts on the first slides of an rdf introduction, 

Show me that slide set please.

> a simple aggregator:
> 
> g = new Model
> while(true) {
>   g load <http://.../some.rdf>
>   sleep(...)
> }
> 
> If some.rdf contains bnodes g will be non-lean after two iterations.

That's not a simple aggregator, it's just broken. Why would you load the same graph multiple times unless you expect the graph to change over time.

Put g into a named graph, and replace its entire contents on each load.

Richard



> 
> Cheers,
> Reto
> 
Received on Thursday, 3 March 2011 12:00:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:48:24 UTC