- From: Marcelo Arenas <marcelo.arenas1@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 09:34:31 +0100
- To: Juan Sequeda <juanfederico@gmail.com>
- Cc: "Ezzat, Ahmed" <Ahmed.Ezzat@hp.com>, Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>, "public-rdb2rdf-wg@w3.org" <public-rdb2rdf-wg@w3.org>
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 5:56 AM, Juan Sequeda <juanfederico@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 11:49 PM, Ezzat, Ahmed <Ahmed.Ezzat@hp.com> wrote: >> >> >> Hi Juan, >> >> We have tasks for the use case. I agree that I do not see enough >> discussion on the distribution list. It was agreed on we need the use case >> completed before diving deeper in the mapping language. This Tuesday let us >> discuss what is left on the use case. Our highest priority is to finalize >> what the team will be delivering sometime in April - higher priority than >> the semantics of the language. > > Great to know. I agree that we should get the use cases out the door asap. > I'm trying to do my share :) >> >> >> I agree for using Datalog in expressing the semantics of the mapping >> language; we should discuss that in the group. If I remember correctly, Andy >> Seaborne used Datalog in expressing the semantics of some SPARQL language >> constructs in the SPARQL WG... > > +1 >> >> >> Lee, Independent of which approach you use, you need to validate the >> semantics of the mew language. Advantage of Datalog, as it is based on >> logic, it is more expressive than relational algebra. Below is few pages >> about Datalog. > > Great set of slides. I honestly think that using datalog to define the > semantics should easy and we have a great team to get it done :) Yes, great set of slides. I also think that datalog is the right choice (and that we have a great team to get the work done :) Cheers, Marcelo
Received on Monday, 22 March 2010 08:35:04 UTC