- From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
- Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2001 20:11:58 +0300
- To: sandro@w3.org
- Cc: geoff@sover.net, bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com, www-rdf-interest@w3.org
> -----Original Message----- > From: ext Sandro Hawke [mailto:sandro@w3.org] > Sent: 19 October, 2001 18:12 > To: Stickler Patrick (NRC/Tampere) > Cc: geoff@sover.net; bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com; www-rdf-interest@w3.org > Subject: Re: RDFCore Update > > > > > Maybe there is yet a better way. Let's hear suggestions. > Though I agree > > that qualified anonymous nodes is not the optimal way to do it (even > > despite low memory prices ;-) > > But the difference only matters in the serialization module; the > internal representation would probably be the same either way. No > difference in memory consumed. > > -- sandro There would be a difference if typed literals were resources. Not a big difference, but a difference nonetheless. And a greater difference if URVs are left "as-is" and type extracted as needed on the fly rather than having explicit arcs to data type resources. Though the compression is, I agree, much more significant in the serialization than the graph. Cheers, Patrick
Received on Friday, 19 October 2001 13:12:35 UTC