Article:		Something Useful This Way Comes
Subject:		"data model"?
Date:		2004-06-09 23:59:54
From:		giovannitummarello
Response to: "data model"?
assuming that's the right definitio of "data model" (according to me it isnt) you anyway get what you want (if that makes you happy) a) data structures are triples, the datamodel is a graph. let me remind you tree is simply a specific case so XML expressibity is just a subset of RDF expressivity b) Operators? Download JENA or any other tool kit and operate as you want, standardization (See query languages) is well on the way c) ever heard of OWL? There might be no intereting semantic web based applications NOW but that doesnt mean anything.. YOU try to make a simpler way to express relations between resources in a standard way. Final word of advice , people that even consider saying "but the syntax is ugly" are making clear that they're so far away from competent the should just plain remain silent. The rdf datamodel is relatively simplex, there are many syntaxes you can chose from, the stuff its the same anyway once you load it in a computational space that has operators for it (say Jena). Finally, i have the feeling that XML people saying rdf is complicated clearly havent read their own stuff.. ( http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/ http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/ )

Previous Message

Up

Next Message

• "data model"?
  2004-06-14 07:28:42 bryan rasmussen [Reply]
  
  "a) data structures are triples, the datamodel is a graph. let me remind you tree is simply a specific case so XML expressibity is just a subset of RDF expressivity"

  
  I really love the whole "a graph is more expressive than a tree" thing, especially as regards rdf which is generally serialized as xml.

  
  So you see, you can express any tree structure in this graph structure which we've expressed in a tree structure.