W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > June 2009

Re: Owning URIs (Was: Yet Another LOD cloud browser)

From: Samur Araujo <samuraraujo@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2009 13:15:57 -0300
Message-ID: <4bb9c0570906020915m7b45fda1ja0aef7b03a33607e@mail.gmail.com>
To: Daniel Schwabe <dschwabe@inf.puc-rio.br>, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Cc: Sherman Monroe <sdmonroe@gmail.com>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>, semantic-web@w3.org
Kingsley, thank you for your tips. I think that Daniel has already answered
your questions. :)

As he said well, at the moment,  I am trying to figure out how to create FTS
for Virtuoso's RDF repositories.

Of course, we want to understand better what is possible to do with
Virtuoso, and I will be working on it next weeks. :)

Regards,
Samur


On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 12:56 PM, Daniel Schwabe <dschwabe@inf.puc-rio.br>wrote:

> Kingsley,
> anticipating Samur's answer,
> Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>
>> ...Samur,
>>
>> Are you exploiting the "Retry" feature of Virtuoso's Anytime Query
>> function?
>>
> no
>
>>
>> Look at: http://lod.openlinksw.com/sparql (note the options at the bottom
>> of the page which are part of our sparql protocol extensions).
>>
> are you referring to the timeout feature?
>
>>
>> You have to think in terms of location aware cost-optimization if you want
>> to venture into the federated query realm (SPARQL or SQL). We've done this
>> work long time ago re. SQL (the Virtual DBMS aspect of Virtuoso), and
>> similar work will be delivered re. SPARQL in due course (the SPARQL-BI
>> extentions and the Anytime Query functionality are  critical infrastructure
>> components for this endeavor).
>>
> We currently use ActiveRDF to manage federation, and it is not customized
> to specific stores. As I've stated before, at the moment we are trying to
> keep Explorator as general as possible, so we are avoiding building
> server-specific versions (although we already did some for FTS...).
> In general, if we think that Explorator can be used to explore the LoD
> cloud (with many different enpoints and servers), we cannot assume
> vendor-specific extensions.
>
>
> Cheers
> D
>
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 2 June 2009 16:16:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Sunday, 31 March 2013 14:24:21 UTC