On 18/01/10 14:46, Daniel Kinzler wrote:
>>   The point is,
>> anyway, that enabling something like SMW (probably with fewer
>> features) is orthogonal to RDFa/microdata/RDF support -- the extension
>> could incidentally output RDF or whatnot, but it doesn't matter for
>> internal use.
>>      
> Perhaps the right approach for us would be to have "some" syntax for providing
> this info, and then generating html5 microdata and/or rdfa into the rendered
> html, write the triple into a smw backend store, and provide 
> rdf/xml/n3/whatever
> output via the api.
>
> there are three aspects here: specify, store, output. perhaps we should look 
> at
> them separately.
>
> -- daniel
>
>
>    

I definitely wouldn't recommend a flat triples store as the only storage 
representation.

Based on past experience with just such a system, while it's formally 
semantically equivalent to higher-level descriptions, it's definitely 
much harder to munge, because you have to reverse-engineer all the 
reification that was needed to flatten the data into triples in order to 
be able to see the higher-level patterns; it's much easier to just store 
the higher-level description in the obvious natural way, and generate 
the triples representation, and any other metadata output needed, from that.

-- Neil


_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Reply via email to