- From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 11:36:04 +0100
- To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
You might have seen a few of these recently such as: implementation report: Sesame and the RDF specs http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-interest/2003Aug/0032.html 3store RDF(S) server implementation report http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-interest/2003Aug/0083.html or even implict ones in "Sesame 0.95 released" [[An in-memory repository that supports RDF+RDFS entailment as specified in the Last Call WD of the RDF Model Theory. Performance tests indicate that the repository copes well with O(10^5) statements (tested with 128MB RAM machine). Upload and querying performance are *a lot* faster than comparable operations on RDBMS repositories ]] -- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-interest/2003Aug/0080.htmll Thes emails are part of or related to the request that went out a few weeks ago for people to report on how they are getting on implementing RDF, and in particular the updates that the RDF Core working group have been doing. See http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-interest/2003Aug/0003.html Personally, I'm pretty confident that some things are implemented completely such as the RDF/XML syntax. However we need more reports of work on the RDF model theory/semantics, entailments and whether full RDF-as-revised is done (for example, do you do datatypes, what do you do with them?, XML literals?, how about languages in literals?). This information is intended to be used as part of the evidence that the RDF Core specifications are implemented and implementable. So we can progress the work on them. Soon, hopefully! So if you implement RDF and would like to state a summary of how you got on, what works, what doesn't, I'd encourage you to email something either to www-rdf-comments@w3.org or copying this list. It doesn't have to be a long email. Thanks Dave
Received on Friday, 15 August 2003 06:36:57 UTC