- From: Paul Tyson <phtyson@sbcglobal.net>
- Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2014 21:39:50 -0600
- To: Antonino Lo Bue <lobue@pa.icar.cnr.it>
- Cc: public-lod@w3.org
On Fri, 2014-12-19 at 17:33 +0000, Antonino Lo Bue wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I'm wondering if someone from the list could make a clear point on SPIN > adoption and usage status. I'm planning to use it in my research work to > model SPARQL inferencing on Open data->Linked open data workflows , but I > have heard that something new is coming and would/could replace SPIN with > a more flexible language. > Is this the case and so I could risk to work with outdated and legacy > stuff? Or do you encourage the adoption? > See also [1], an email thread from 2 years ago on similar topic. Since then I have adopted RIF for my practical work of capturing business rules and translating them into SPARQL. Some of the gaps between RIF and SPARQL are discussed in [2]. I do not (at this time) do any logical processing of the RIF source; however, to fill some of the syntactical gaps I adopt portions of the SPIN vocabulary as RIF externals (for instance, to express SPARQL property paths in RIF). [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/2013Jan/0136.html [2] http://www.polleres.net/presentations/20120913Datalog20_Tutorial.pdf Regards, --Paul > Thanks and regards > > Antonino Lo Bue > CNR-ICAR Palermo > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/antoninolobue > > >
Received on Tuesday, 23 December 2014 03:44:11 UTC