>
> No , both better in performance, and in the spirit of Sem Web

Hm, the performance when using value as string or URI to resource was quite
same. On 10 000 examples it was 4.46ms vs 4.44ms. I didn't notice any
difference even when I tested string of 1000 characters length.

But I understood your idea, my issue with performance is just caused by
retrieving more named graphs than one and reasoning over it in order to get
the actual string value.
So, in the end it is following the Semantic web logic but the extra actions
cost almost double drop in speed unless I come up with some better idea of
organizing the dataset.

So, to make it clear - the preferred way is replacing the repeatable value
with resource URIs and avoiding the strings?

Thanks for the advice

On Fri, 15 Feb 2019 at 14:52, Jean-Marc Vanel <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Le ven. 15 févr. 2019 à 13:45, Ekaterina Danilova <
> [email protected]> a écrit :
>
> > ....
> >
>
>
> > I understand that you have a database of Vcard stuff, but one must keep
> in
> > > mind that Semantic Web is all about creating links, filling strings is
> > > secondary.
> > >
> > So, does it mean that creating resource is the better attitude in the
> sense
> > of Semantic web but worse in the sense of performance?
> >
> > No , both better in performance, and in the spirit of Sem Web .
>

Reply via email to