On Fri, 2003-03-14 at 16:59, Dan Brickley wrote:
> In an XML encoding of RDF, you could use XML entities to keep document
> size down through text re-use. In an RDF implementation, database etc. you
> are free to invent your own optimisations to avoid duplication of
> textual content. I'm not convinced we _need_ extra machinery in RDF itself
> based on this use case (though I can imagine it being handy...).
Storing it is not the problem, but rather referring to it from within
RDF. It cannot, for example, be reliably reified: if the textual content
is modified, the reification is invalid.
We have this problem when trying to store layout information for
presentations of RDF graphs - there is no way to say "that literal",
e.g, "that literal should be placed there" and at the same time allowing
that literal to change.
I do think the use of literals as subjects is a stronger argument,
Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose