 |
 |
I question I've already asked here, but received no answer to: what's the ballpark number of triples we're talking about? Here's a list of large triplestore setups to compare with: https://www.w3.org/wiki/LargeTripleStores On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 10:47 AM, Bernhard Eversberg <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > 10.04.2015 09:18, Ross Singer: >> >> But if you're just using DESCRIBEs, why bother with a triplestore? Why >> bother storing it natively as RDF at all? >> >> BIBFRAME only touches part of a library's data, and it doesn't make much >> sense to model the rest as RDF. ... Even >> more unnecessary if it's sole purpose is to enable queries that are not >> even particularly useful. >> > It is unfortunate that not much can be said up to now about the use > cases to be expected. Though it was very likely deliberate by LC to not > specify anything about use scenarios when they commissioned the > development of BIBFRAME - so as not to anticipate anything that might > be too library specific or backward. > But one thing is clear: storage methods will have to scale well. Very > well indeed. Both in terms of data volume and access traffic volume. > What's the attitude of OCLC in that regard, and the vendors'? I mean, > they should have some views, based on their experience. > > B.Eversberg