- From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 08:51:27 -0400
- To: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Cc: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>, semantic-web@w3.org
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 17:56 +0530, Richard Cyganiak wrote:
> On 27 Mar 2011, at 18:17, Sandro Hawke wrote:
> > If I say
> > store.load("http://example.org/g1")
> > store.load("http://example.org/g2")
> > and g1 and g2 happen to return the same g-text containing bnodes, maybe:
> > _:x foaf:knows _:y
> > then yeah, we'll have to Skolemize them differently.
> >
> > But if I say:
> > store.load("http://example.org/g1")
> > and then repeat it:
> > store.load("http://example.org/g1")
> > and it get the same g-text, I think it's appropriate for the store to
> > use the same Skolem constants.
>
> That's an implementation issue. If a store wants to do something smart to skolemize to the same constant, fine. But that's orthogonal to the discussion here.
Yes, it's an implementation issues, but I don't think it's orthogonal,
because it speaks to the practicalities of Skolemizing. I think the
main problem with Skolemizing is that you can generate a great many
low-value, redundant URIs. By flagging them, folks downstream are more
seriously encouraged to try to collapse them. But if we don't do some
collapsing at the start, I don't think I'm comfortable with suggesting
folks do this at all.
So I was hoping people knew some good techniques for collapsing them
(or, equivalently, safely reusing them). Unfortunately, I don't think
there are good solutions here.
-- Sandro
Received on Wednesday, 30 March 2011 12:51:38 UTC