Difference between revisions of "SPARQL and Information Hiding"
(Created page with "== SPARQL, RDF, and Ontology Approach: Challenges with Information Hiding == The SPARQL, RDF, and ontology approach faces several challenges when it comes to adhering to the i...") |
|||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
These factors result in less flexibility and higher interdependency among system components. | These factors result in less flexibility and higher interdependency among system components. | ||
| − | [[Category:snapquery]][[Category: | + | [[Category:snapquery]][[Category:LLM]] |
Revision as of 18:23, 10 July 2024
SPARQL, RDF, and Ontology Approach: Challenges with Information Hiding
The SPARQL, RDF, and ontology approach faces several challenges when it comes to adhering to the information hiding principle:
Global Data Exposure: RDF triples and ontologies expose data globally, making all data accessible via a uniform query language (SPARQL). This violates the principle of encapsulating internal data structures within modules. Lack of Encapsulation: Ontologies define a shared, explicit schema where all relationships and concepts are visible, rather than hiding specific implementation details within separate modules. Direct Schema Dependencies: Applications using SPARQL often rely directly on ontology structures, leading to tight coupling and reducing flexibility when ontologies change. No Modular Interfaces: Ontologies lack modular interfaces, meaning changes to one part can impact others due to a shared, interconnected structure.
These factors result in less flexibility and higher interdependency among system components.