[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RDF == the "binary relational model"? was Re: Meta-somethingo

• To: XML Developers List <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RDF == the "binary relational model"? was Re: Meta-somethingorother
• From: Michael Champion <mc@x...>
• Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 12:14:53 -0400
• In-reply-to: <20040614144723.GD14122@m...>
• References: <0E36FD96D96FCA4AA8E8F2D199320E520212EC67@R...> <p06010202bcef46a8e8f7@[192.168.254.88]> <20040611165350.GB14122@m...> <p06010203bcf09c0d1e93@[192.168.254.88]> <2E9DDDC2-BC79-11D8-BADE-000A95BA5A2C@o...> <20040614144723.GD14122@m...>

On Jun 14, 2004, at 10:47 AM, Mark Baker wrote:
>
> No, I think I said what I meant.  It was an analogy.  I'm not saying
> that RDF *is* a standardized database schema, I'm saying that choosing
> RDF is *analogous* to choosing one in the sense that the architectural
> properties that are induced are very similar

I've wondered for years about the analogy between RDF and the 
binary-relational model (cf 
http://www.dbdebunk.com/page/page/1147347.htm) in which everything is 
modeled as two entities with a relationship between them  There's also 
variants such as the Associative Model of Data 
http://www.lazysoft.com/resources_downloads.htm

As Dare implies, there has got to be some sort of mapping between the 
abstraction of triples / binary relations and actual application data.  
Of course that's true with raw XML or the n-ary relational model, but 
triples seem to be a pretty abstract abstraction, and it sounds like 
this is one reason why the binary relational approach hasn't taken off.

I just wonder whether RDF advocates are aware of these other 
triples-like approaches, what they think they've learned from them, or 
whether they think the analogy is misleading?

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: RDF == the "binary relational model"? was Re: Meta-somethingorother
    • From: Frank Manola <fmanola@a...>
  • Re: RDF == the "binary relational model"?
    • From: Jonathan Borden <jonathan@o...>

• References:
  • RE: Meta-somethingorother (was the semantic web mega-permathread thing)
    • From: "Joshua Allen" <joshuaa@m...>
  • RE: Meta-somethingorother (was the semantic webmega-permathread thing)
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>
  • Re: Meta-somethingorother (was the semantic web mega-permathread thing)
    • From: Mark Baker <distobj@a...>
  • Re: Meta-somethingorother (was the semantic webmega-permathread thing)
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>
  • Re: Meta-somethingorother (was the semantic web mega-permathread thing)
    • From: Jonathan Borden <jonathan@o...>
  • Re: Meta-somethingorother (was the semantic web mega-permathread thing)
    • From: Mark Baker <distobj@a...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Meta-somethingorother (was the semantic web mega-permathread thing)
• Next by Date: Re: Early Draft Review: XQuery for Java (JSR 225)
• Previous by thread: Re: Meta-somethingorother (was the semantic web mega-permathread thing)
• Next by thread: Re: RDF == the "binary relational model"?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread