- From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2011 10:03:02 +0000
- To: nathan@webr3.org
- CC: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>, RDF Working Group WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
On 06/03/11 14:40, Nathan wrote: > Richard Cyganiak wrote: >> My concern isn't all that much about graph literals, although I don't >> see the evidence for them being needed. > > Cool, okay - do you know of any problems that may be caused by including > them? Depends what "they" are exactly but a range from large literals can be a pain (not that well supported by stores - this is minor and would get fixed if there were demand) through to retooling RDF processors to have graph nodes to make graph literals at all usable with API extensions to provide sane access to graph literals for applications. Equality rules. Andy > > Cheers, Nathan >
Received on Monday, 7 March 2011 10:03:39 UTC