- From: Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>
- Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 15:16:38 +0100
- To: Steve Harris <S.W.Harris@ecs.soton.ac.uk>, www-rdf-interest@w3.org
At 09:32 14/08/03 +0100, Steve Harris wrote:
>On Tue, Aug 12, 2003 at 05:09:12 -0700, Garret Wilson wrote:
> > The design of rdf:List looks good in theory, but there are a few details
> > that make it a pain to implement---particularly, the way rdf#nil is used:
>
>Its also quite awkward to query for, eg. in RDQL. I guess we need some
>kind of idiom that means is a memeber of this list. Theres nothing that
>logically comes from the structure though, unlike with collections.
If you query raw RDF data using just RDQL or similar, I would have to agree.
FWIW, when I implemented some (in-memory) RDF-query software, I found it
convenient to add special forms to query container- and list-
membership. Either of these could have been implemented using a
combination of inference combined with simple data query.
With lists, these leaves the possibility that there may be a significant
penalty for list membership queries based on (say) a relational database
RDF store. I suspect that this can be optimized in an implementation.
#g
------------
Graham Klyne _________
GK@ninebynine.org ___|_o_o_o_|_¬
\____________/
(nb Helva) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ @Perivale, Grand Union Canal
Received on Friday, 15 August 2003 15:29:40 UTC