W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > April 2010

Re: [Patterns] Materialize Inferences (was Re: Triple materialization at publisher level)

From: Leigh Dodds <leigh.dodds@talis.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 10:52:11 +0100
Message-ID: <q2pf323a4471004100252l59bdd0c9y41b69655831e256d@mail.gmail.com>
To: Giovanni Tummarello <giovanni.tummarello@deri.org>
Cc: public-lod <public-lod@w3.org>, Vasiliy Faronov <vfaronov@gmail.com>
Hi,

On 7 April 2010 11:27, Giovanni Tummarello <giovanni.tummarello@deri.org> wrote:
>
> My biggest concern with this text is its complexity.
>
> We get it.. but what about people who have less than many years of
> specific interest in this :/

Yes, that's a fair point. I did wonder when drafting the text about
providing some more guidance on what might be materialized.

> in PRACTICE i dont know what the common shared belief is but i think
> RDFa embedding or microdata will become the defacto for all (i
> recently heard a talk by musicbrainz for example in which they say
> yeah we'll add rdfa, why not its easy and this is more or less the
> common thinking)
>
> In this casematerialization is likely not going to happen much (you
> wouldnt want to materialize inside something visible for the end user
> etc).

Well the intention is not to just write up those patterns that we
think will get broad adoption, or that are the easiest to implement.
The goal is to understand the range of issues that people are facing
when publishing, modelling and consuming Linked Data and attempt to
provide well documented solutions.

Some of those patterns may be discarded, but the knowledge has still
been captured.

Not every application uses the Factory design pattern, but its useful for some.

> It would certainly help to have a list of clients and applications
> that will/will not require materialization. E.g. st Sindice and
> http://Sig.manot needing it but say tabulator and other libraries
> needing it. then one could decide if its worth the extra effort (which
> is definitely non neglectable).

I like the idea, and I see its been explored further later in the
thread, of capturing in some way the input requirements for an
application.

Its like describing receptors (the application) and signalling
molecules (the data patterns) in biochemistry.

Cheers,

L.
--
Leigh Dodds
Programme Manager, Talis Platform
Talis
leigh.dodds@talis.com
http://www.talis.com
Received on Saturday, 10 April 2010 09:52:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Sunday, 31 March 2013 14:24:26 UTC