Re: Well Behaved RDF - Taming Blank Nodes, etc.

>>>>> Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net> writes:
>>>>> On 12/18/2012 10:23 AM, Ivan Shmakov wrote:

[…]

 >> This way, one may easily end up with hundreds of URI's, each naming
 >> one and the only person which was unfortunate enough to sit next to
 >> our Lee.

 >> … And don't forget about all the owl:sameAs arcs necessary to manage
 >> this crowd!

 > OK, sure.  Why is having hundreds of URIs for this person any worse
 > than having hundreds of distinct blank nodes?

	First of all, I'd assume that a typical RDF store implementation
	will assign temporary identifiers (most likely integers) to
	/all/ the nodes — both blank and named.  This way, one could
	conserve space by /not/ storing permanent identifiers (URI's) in
	addition to the temporary ones.

	But perhaps even more compelling reason to use blank nodes is
	that instead of introducing owl:sameAs arcs, one may just
	replace two (or more) distinct blank nodes, — found to be
	representing the same entity, — with a sole node possessing the
	union of the properties of such blank nodes.  (Provided we check
	for, and resolve, any semantic conflicts there are, that is.)

-- 
FSF associate member #7257