Hi Andrii,
On 11/22/2014 2:10 AM, Andrii Stesin wrote:
Hi Bo,
yes it definitely has something in common. Would you please mind
pointing me to some explanations, why reification is considered so harmful?
because it simply blows up your amount of data and makes it more
complicated to access your data. Here are two pointers that include some
explanations of the drawbacks of the "standardized" RDF reification
approach:
- "Handbook of Semantic Web Technologies" by D. Fensel et al.; 2011,;
page 130
- "Pattern Representation Model for n-ary Relations in Ontology" by Vinu
P.V. et al.; 2014; page 4
However, there are many other explanations out in there in the wild,
wild web ;) (unfortunately, answers.semanticweb.com is down atm, which
is also a good starting point for semantic web related questions)
I see some interesting points there, namely
The subject of a reification
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/REC-rdf11-mt-20140225/#dfn-reification>
is intended to refer to a concrete realization of an RDF triple,
such as a document in a surface syntax, rather than a triple
considered as an abstract object. This *supports use cases where
properties such as dates of composition or provenance information
are applied to the reified triple*, which are meaningful *only when
thought of as referring to a particular instance* or token of a triple.
it seems worth the attention at the very least. And also
Since the relation between triples and reification
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/REC-rdf11-mt-20140225/#dfn-reification>s
of triples in any RDF graph or graphs need not be one-to-one,
asserting a property about some entity described by a reification
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/REC-rdf11-mt-20140225/#dfn-reification>
need not entail that the same property holds of another such entity,
even if it has the same components.
This seems interesting to me. Also I like dictionary approach like in
RDF HDT format <http://www.rdfhdt.org/technical-specification/#triples>.
What do you think about this combination as a basic data model?
The dictionary approach as it is applied in RDF HDT is good for
compressing the amount of information and enabling quick access to
certain information pointers (so its an excellent exchange format in my
mind). However, its no graph structure, and hence, bad when working
(querying) with the information.
Cheers,
Bo
[1]
http://books.google.de/books?id=sdEFvSb9WNsC&lpg=PP1&hl=de&pg=PA130#v=onepage&q&f=false
[2] http://www.jatit.org/volumes/Vol60No2/6Vol60No2.pdf
WBR,
Andrii
On Saturday, November 22, 2014 12:12:16 AM UTC+2, Bo Ferri wrote:
Hi Andrii,
well, this looks like a re-incarnation of RDF reification [1], which is
the worst modelling option for subject-predicate-object statements
in my
mind ;)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the
Google Groups "Neo4j" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/neo4j/M_lOoLU9F1g/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Neo4j" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
