- 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