-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
sort the prefixes by popularity #17
Comments
http://prefix.cc/popular/all.txt seems to return them in the right order:
|
I suppose it comes down to an implementation detail, that the mapping is represented internally as a hash, and therefore unordered. So, it is probably just a matter of having time to change it so that there is a an array of prefixes... I tend to agree, this behaviour is rather odd, but someone has to set aside time to do it. :-) |
The current release returns them in sorted order - I don't mind changing the order to something else. This only affects reverse lookup which is less relevant because every RDF serialization should declare its prefix-namespace mapping anyway. |
Version 20150725 returned
If your module does reverse lookup in |
Yeah, I agree that sorted by popularity would be a better solution, but I suppose that's a different issue? |
The problem is that the reverse lookup returns BAD prefixes (eg |
This feature requires an extension of the internal database and the update mechanism for reverse lookup. Each prefix could get an additional popularity ranking (1,2...n) among all prefixes that share the same namespace (additional column in By the way RDF::SN uses a different sort order to prefer shorter prefixes. |
Run this several times
and you get different answers, eg
xs xds
etc.The doc says "If multiple prefixes are defined, it is not determinstic which one is returned!" But I wonder why it has to be so:
If you ask http://prefix.cc about
http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#
it confidently answersxsd
. It has these voting buttons so worse alternatives likexs xds
are not returned. Can't the module use this voting info?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: