On Sep 2, 2009, at 11:53 AM, Peter Hunsberger wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 10:47 AM, Frank Manola<fmanola@a...> wrote:
>>
>>
>> A variant on this might be a good way to tease out some of the  
>> issues people
>> have with RDF (or with definitions of data in general).  Suppose we  
>> answered
>> Roger's original question by saying that data is anything that can  
>> fit into
>> a relational DBMS.  The fit isn't always obvious (hence issues of  
>> database
>> design), but take that as a starting point.  Now lets discuss the  
>> problems
>> folks have with that definition.  Since anything you can fit into a
>> relational DBMS you can fit into RDF (with its own issues of  
>> "database
>> design"), presumably many of the problems will be the same.
>>
>
> The big difference is that RDF should be mostly all inclusive;
> metadata (well at least partial), relationships and data all laid out
> in one (or two if you count the schema) place.  You won't see that big
> picture with a DBMS.

You say RDF *should* be mostly all inclusive.  Should I infer that you  
think it isn't?  If so, in what way?  What are some examples?

I also don't understand what you're saying about the "big picture" you  
don't see with a DBMS.  LIke what?  Is it that there's stuff you  
*can't* put in the database, or stuff that people typically *don't*  
but in the database?

--Frank

>
> -- 
> Peter Hunsberger


_______________________________________________________________________

XML-DEV is a publicly archived, unmoderated list hosted by OASIS
to support XML implementation and development. To minimize
spam in the archives, you must subscribe before posting.

[Un]Subscribe/change address: http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/
Or unsubscribe: xml-dev-unsubscribe@l...
subscribe: xml-dev-subscribe@l...
List archive: http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php