W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-rules@w3.org > May 2003

RE: my notes on our group discussion today on RDF Query via XQuery, in WWW-2003 BOF on RDF Query&Rules

From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 12:30:13 +0300
Message-ID: <A03E60B17132A84F9B4BB5EEDE57957B01B90E60@trebe006.europe.nokia.com>
To: <massimo@w3.org>, <bgrosof@MIT.EDU>, <www-rdf-rules@w3.org>, <eric@w3.org>, <connolly@w3.org>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Massimo Marchiori [mailto:massimo@w3.org]
> Sent: 27 May, 2003 03:05
> To: Stickler Patrick (NMP/Tampere); bgrosof@MIT.EDU;
> www-rdf-rules@w3.org; eric@w3.org; connolly@w3.org
> Subject: RE: my notes on our group discussion today on RDF Query via
> XQuery, in WWW-2003 BOF on RDF Query&Rules
> > Are we talking here about using a variant of XQuery on RDF/XML
> > or on the RDF graph?
> > 
> > I personally think it is a big mistake (and this may be stating
> > the obvious) to base any RDF query language on any particular
> > serialization of the graphl. The RDF MT applies only to the
> > graph, and the motivations for various serializations vary
> > yet are unified by how they all express the same graph model.
> > 
> > I'm all for having a recognizable variant of XQuery which is 
> > optimized for queries executed against an RDF graph, as that
> > can simplify both training and implementation.
> > 
> > But please, let's not concern ourselves with RDF serializations.
> > 
> Patrick, sorry I couldn't reply earlier (I was off during the 
> weekend).
> Eric already gave a first reasonable reply, on which I agree. 
> Let me be more precise: serializations are not per se "evil".

Never said they were. They are a necessary means to an end.

> It's like saying that for a programming language, talking about
> syntax is a bad thing...;) Good myth, but just a myth: it's not, 
> provided we have a clear model and semantics for the 
> language. 

I think you're reading this "anti-syntax" sentiment into my post.

> So, syntax is 
> bad if used as a replacement for its other missing 
> theoretical counterparts. 
> Otherwhise, it is just a convenient way to express semantics. 

Precisely. And I was of course at the disadvantage of not having
been present during the BOF and other discussions, but privious
proposals that I've seen regarding using XQuery for RDF have
amounted to operating directly on the RDF/XML.

So I got (apparently needlessly) concerned.


Received on Tuesday, 27 May 2003 05:31:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:46:15 UTC