Thank you all for your help !

On 22 September 2016 at 14:20, Nikolaos Beredimas <bere...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Just remember that there is no ordering in this.
>
> [Document_A] --contains--> [Paragraph_1]
> [Document_A] --contains--> [Paragraph_2]
> [Document_B] --contains--> [Paragraph_2]
>
> is equivalent to
>
> [Document_A] --contains--> [Paragraph_2]
> [Document_B] --contains--> [Paragraph_2]
> [Document_A] --contains--> [Paragraph_1]
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 3:14 PM, Laurent Rucquoy <
> laurent.rucq...@telemis.com> wrote:
>
> > I have a "Document" resource which could contain many "Paragraph"
> > resources.
> > A same "Paragraph" resource could also be contained by different
> "Document"
> > resources.
> >
> > What is the most relevant model to translate such a case in RDF ?
> > I have two solutions:
> >
> > Solution 1 (using RDF collections)
> > [Document_A] --contains--> ( [Paragraph_1], [Paragraph_2] )
> > [Document_B] --contains--> ( [Paragraph_2] )
> >
> > or
> >
> > Solution 2 (defining the same predicate several times on the same
> subject)
> > [Document_A] --contains--> [Paragraph_1]
> > [Document_A] --contains--> [Paragraph_2]
> > [Document_B] --contains--> [Paragraph_2]
> >
> >
> > I think that the Solution 1 requires complex and resource-consuming
> SPARQL
> > update.
> > So to keep it simple, I would choose the Solution 2. But, I don't know if
> > it's safe and if it's a good practice to define the same predicate
> several
> > times on the same subject ?
> >
> > Thank you in advance for your help.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Laurent
> >
>

Reply via email to