- From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 07:10:33 +0000
- To: Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>, "Seth Russell" <seth@robustai.net>
- Cc: "www-rdf-comments" <www-rdf-comments@w3.org>
rdf-comments is for formal communication with the WG. This thread seems to be more of a general discussion. Please consider moving it to rdf-interest or rdf-logic. Brian At 23:43 14/03/2002 +0000, Graham Klyne wrote: >Seth, > >With the first level of nesting, I agree that the number of triples for N >statements increases to 4N. > >But with the next level of nesting, in the framework I was describing, >each of those 4N triples itself becomes 4-fold, for a total, of 16N. Next >level of nesting gives 64N. etc. > >Sure, there's a lot of redundant information in there, which is my point >about implementations optimizing the representation. What I'm trying to >say here is that the reification quad gives us a way to formally represent >this kind of information, but that a pragmatic encoding with 1:1 >correspondence can be more efficient. > >E.g., consider: > >(1) s p o . > >(2) _:s1 rdf:type rdf:Statement . > _:s1 rdf:subject s . > _:s1 rdf:property p . > _:s1 rdf:object o . > >(3) _:s21 rdf:type rdf:Statement . > _:s21 rdf:subject _:s1 . > _:s21 rdf:property rdf:type . > _:s21 rdf:object rdf:statement . > > _:s22 rdf:type rdf:Statement . > _:s22 rdf:subject _:s1 . > _:s22 rdf:property rdf:subject . > _:s22 rdf:object s . > > _:s23 rdf:type rdf:Statement . > _:s23 rdf:subject _:s1 . > _:s23 rdf:property rdf:property . > _:s23 rdf:object p . > > _:s24 rdf:type rdf:Statement . > _:s24 rdf:subject _:s1 . > _:s24 rdf:property rdf:object . > _:s24 rdf:object o . > >(4) ...etc... > >#g >-- > >At 01:13 PM 3/14/02 -0800, Seth Russell wrote: >>From: "Graham Klyne" <GK@ninebynine.org> >> >> > That said, I rather like this idea. As it happens, I've made some >> > notes about extending the model theory to handle N3 style contexts >> > (which I think map quite nicely to this suggestion): >> > >> > http://www.ninebynine.org/RDFNotes/UsingContextsWithRDF.html >> >>Which is much appreciated :) But in which you say: >>[[ >>Using this approach, the number of triples will increase exponentially with >>the depth of context nesting. >>]] >> >>Which I don't think is true. I think it is basically just 4 (maybe 5) times >>the number of triples. The number of triples for any level of nesting is >>just 4N + (if N>1, N) where N is the number of statements in whatever level >>of nesting past the top. Note this even provides that all the statements in >>one context are conjunctive. See mentograph: >> >>http://robustai.net/mentography/nesting_context.gif >> >>Seth Russell > >------------------- >Graham Klyne ><GK@NineByNine.org>
Received on Friday, 15 March 2002 02:23:41 UTC