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

Re: RDF query and Rules - my two cents

From: NMP-MSW/Tampere <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 12:09:36 +0200
Cc: "Graham Klyne" <GK@ninebynine.org>, "Jim Hendler" <hendler@cs.umd.edu>, "Dan Brickley" <danbri@w3.org>, <www-rdf-rules@w3.org>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
To: "ext Danny Ayers" <danny666@virgilio.it>
Message-Id: <505E23DE-19AF-11D8-BAA5-000A95EAFCEA@nokia.com>

On Monday, Nov 17, 2003, at 21:44 Europe/Helsinki, ext Danny Ayers 

>> At 11:55 11/11/03 -0500, Jim Hendler wrote:
>>> 1 - I think there is a clear and present need in the RDF community 
>>> for a
>>> way to essentially request a set of triples from a remote store --
>>> essentially an RDF remote access API. [...]
>> Yes!
> +1.
> In fact I'd be tempted to separate this need from the more general
> rule/query drive to get it moving quickly.

I agree that query should be addressed separately from rules (and
I'm not convinced that we're ready to begin the standardization
process for rules just yet, but that's another discussion entirely...)

> I think a suitable approach would be to build on the existing RDF 
> remote
> access API - that of RDF/XML+HTTP. A http GET will retrieve a model 
> over the
> network based on a supplied URI. The RESTful continuation would start 
> with a
> PUT to place it on the network, DELETE remove it.

I consider this far too coarse grained to be efficient and generally 
(note the important qualification 'generally').

A given model might be *huge*. GETting and PUTting entire models seems
to me to be a corner case, and not what most folks really need/want to 

Let's please separate issues relating to knowledge management from
those relating to knowledge discovery. What the SW needs acutely, IMO,
is a lightweight, efficient, intuitive and easy to implement solution
for knowledge discovery.



Received on Tuesday, 18 November 2003 05:11:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:46:16 UTC