Holger,

Added a few lines of code to insert baseURI  comment statements when  
writing models.  The result is fantastic: the baseURI scan on new  
models is so fast it is imperceptible and TBC now launches in under 7  
seconds.

It looks like the baseURI  comment is only used in the N3 and N-TRIPLE  
language formats, so I need to restrict the inserted comments to  
these. Right?

thanks  

Arthur

On Mar 19, 2009, at 10:04 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote:

>
> The file head is already being scanned, but right now the code stops
> at the first @prefix declaration. We could in theory check for a
> default namespace, but this is not always present and just a heuristic
> to find the base URI.
>
> Holger
>
>
> On Mar 19, 2009, at 7:36 PM, Arthur Keen wrote:
>
>>
>> They are n3 files. I like your idea of scanning the file head.  Would
>> this be as simple as scanning for #baseURI or PREFIX :    and if that
>> does not exist go through the rest of the file?
>>
>> A
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Mar 19, 2009, at 7:31 PM, Holger Knublauch  
>> <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Hi Arthur,
>>>
>>> yes this is a problem. TBC scans the whole workspace at start-up to
>>> discover the base URIs of each file so that other files that import
>>> that base URI get redirected to the local file instead of going to
>>> the
>>> web.
>>>
>>> With files created (or at least saved) with TBC, this is normally no
>>> problem, because they will contain the #baseURI comment in the
>>> beginning and scanning can then proceed without loading the whole
>>> file.
>>>
>>> Files created with other tools may not have this convention (or
>>> contain @base which Jena currently does not support; see other  
>>> thread
>>> recently). Then, TBC needs to decide whether it should try to load  
>>> it
>>> to learn about its base URI (which is normally an instance of
>>> owl:Ontology). We currently do this, and this is the problem with
>>> large files that you discover. I could add an option to switch this
>>> behavior off, but then those files will known under a different  
>>> (more
>>> or less meaningless file:/// baseURI). Nor will it be clear to the
>>> user what happens. Another solution might be to try to just load the
>>> first few lines of the file. I need to think about better solutions.
>>>
>>> In the meantime, yes please add the #baseURI comment to your files
>>> when you generate them.
>>>
>>> Are these NT or N3 files?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Holger
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mar 19, 2009, at 4:10 PM, Arthur wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> As I generate larger model files (using Jena to parse proprietary
>>>> reservoir model files) and save them in Composer's namespace, it
>>>> takes
>>>> Composer  longer and longer to scan for the baseURI, often several
>>>> minutes, before I can open them in Composer.  Using a text  
>>>> editor, I
>>>> can see that Composer alters the freshly generated model files when
>>>> it
>>>> scans them and puts in  metadata comments (#Saved
>>>> by...#baseURI...#imports...).  So Composer is reading and writing
>>>> the
>>>> model files to add these comments to the header when it scans.
>>>>
>>>> Since acquiring these large files, Composer also takes over 10
>>>> minutes
>>>> to launch.  I assume it is scanning for base URI's in all the files
>>>> in
>>>> the workspace.
>>>>
>>>> What can I do to avoid this, beyond the obvious reduction in file
>>>> size?  Would it help to insert the (#Saved
>>>> by...#baseURI...#imports...) comments whenthe models are created or
>>>> is
>>>> there a statement I can add to a model so that composer can quickly
>>>> locate the baseURI?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>>
>>>> Arthur
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>
>>>
>
>
> >


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TopBraid Composer Users" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/topbraid-composer-users?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to