Re: rdfapi question

I'm creating a program to read a rdfs file and say I get the
predicate: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#subClassOf, and I
want to create two local objects in another language that handle a
class relationship.  I basically want to create a Tree structure
of the class hiearchy defined in an rdf file.

First I want to create an rdfsclass object, then link it to its
superclass.  If the superclass wasn't already created, then I need
to create that.  My problem occurs in finding out if my local
superclass object has been created already, I then need to
traverse through all the class objects that I've created to see if
this one exists yet.  This process is to create a pointer to the 
superclass object.  I can't create a pointer in this programming
language if the other class doesn't exist yet, so searching of all
my class objects up until that point will need to be done to link
them properly.  

Since I'm trying to create a tree of the class hiearchy, I need the 
root nodes to come first, this way I can assume it exists and have 
no need to search another structure to see if I've created it
already.

Am I oblivious to something else or is this a common problem?  If
anyone has a proposed solution I would appreciate it if they could
please share it with me.  Thanks.
    

* Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com> [010508 14:23]:
> Hi Chris,
> 
> I'm afraid I don't have an answer for you, but I do have an interest in RDF
> API's and understanding their requirements.  It would help my understanding if
> you could explain why the order of the statements is significant in your
> application.
> 
> Brian
> 
> 
> Chris Cera wrote:
> > 
> > How can I get a model to dump the triples for an rdf schema in the
> > order they were declared in the file.  The files that I have
> > constructed have all declarations defined sequentially and I would
> > like to extract them in the same way.  Could somebody please email
> > me if you have dealt with this problem, or have a workaround that
> > is not too computationally expensive.  Thank you very much.

Received on Tuesday, 8 May 2001 10:46:38 UTC