W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-logic@w3.org > May 2001

Re: What do the ontologists want

From: <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 10:10:38 +0100
To: phayes@ai.uwf.edu
Cc: sean@mysterylights.com, www-rdf-logic@w3.org
Message-Id: <OF087A9669.B12BD871-ON41256A50.002F10BB@bayer-ag.com>

[...]
> I was talking yesterday to a guy who has started three successful
> companies in this area, who told me they had tried using XML and
> discovered that the notation was such a crock that about 90% of their
> transmission traffic was being used up sending meaningless notational
> strings back and forth, causing performance problems; so they just
> trashed XML and wrote their own notation.

There's indeed a point here. Yesterday I was doing a testcase
with 200001 concepts used in 100000 statements (no real application,
just stress testing some inference engines). In that particular
testcase I found that the RDF/XML file could be zipped 20 times.
Using RDF/N3 this was just 4 times. So the XML file is 10 MB, the
N3 file is 2 MB and the binary compressed file is 0.5 MB. Needless
to say that this is having an impact on communication, storage and
processing. We found the best balance with N3 [1][2][3][4].

--
Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/

[1] http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Notation3.html
[2] http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/
[3] http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/Primer.html
[4] http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/Examples.html
Received on Friday, 18 May 2001 04:16:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:45:37 UTC