- From: James Cerra <jfcst24_public@yahoo.com>
- Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 13:32:02 -0800 (PST)
- To: Damian Steer <damian.steer@hp.com>
- Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org, Laurian Gridinoc <laurian@gmail.com>
Damian, Thanks for the clarification. I don't think I every really had a good grasp on how treehugger or RDFTwig worked, I guess. I'm sorry for spreading disinformation. ;-) > That's not really true of either RDFTwig or treehugger. Consider myself corrected. > I've been using it on models with a few hundred thousand > triples and it's pretty nippy. That's impressive. If it's a public model, mind sending me the link? Nemo could use some more testing. > > * They seem to concentrate on quereies stored in > > seperate files. For my purposes, it is more > > advantageous to query rdf data that is embedded in a > > file. > > Well the queries are over models which could be database > backed or/and have inferencing. As for data embedded in > files, well if ARP can parse it we can use it. What I mean is something like: <document> <metadata> <!-- rdf data --> </metadata> <body> <!-- document text --> </body> </document> That's the inital reason why I was looking into RDF-in-XSLT support in the first place. I could use a pipe, but I wanted to do querying directly in the transform stage. I also felt that the approaches of querying documents by treehugger and RDFTwig were complicated, while RDQL just clicked in my head. In my mind, I think in RDF very differently than with XML's model. The path-like approaches just didn't make much sense to me. Now, I think I understand where you are comming from. However, I still perfer RDQL (it is how I think). > 1) If you want to make a query that returns rdf CONSTRUCT > (from Sesame originally) is very interesting. Ack! I can see where it is useful, but I'd rather keep transformation neatly seperated from the querying specification. > 2) Queries can return results in an XML format [2] that > can subsequently be transformed with xslt or XQuery. > Alberto Reggiori and Andy Seaborne have demonstrations of > this (I'll try to find the references if you're > interested). Sounds interesting. > Hope this has clarified some things, and good luck > with Nemo Thank you. I'm sorry for spreading disinformation. ;-) -- Jimmy Cerra __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com
Received on Wednesday, 1 December 2004 21:32:34 UTC