W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-wg@w3.org > November 2008

Re: [RIF] action-635 completed ([Fwd: Re: Initial draft of XG Recommendation])

From: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2008 14:42:10 +0000
Message-ID: <491453C2.8020505@deri.org>
To: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
CC: "Public-Rif-Wg (E-mail)" <public-rif-wg@w3.org>

We will discuss it in todays RDB2RDF telecon... I uploaded some slides 
on the esw wiki:

http://esw.w3.org/topic/Rdb2RdfXG?action=AttachFile&do=get&target=RIF4RDB2RDF.pdf

I personally think the following are missing for an RDB2RIF "dialect":

- aggregates
- bnode generation
- some other special builtinf, or even a generic SQL built-in

Axel

Axel Polleres wrote:
> 
> FYI.
> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/actions/635 completed
> Axel
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: Initial draft of XG Recommendation
> Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2008 20:33:57 +0000
> From: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
> Organization: DERI, National University of Ireland, Galway
> To: ashok.malhotra@oracle.com
> CC: public-xg-rdb2rdf <public-xg-rdb2rdf@w3.org>
> References: <4911FD27.9020000@oracle.com>
> 
> I mentioned the progress of RDB2RDB in yesterdays RIF teleconf.
> Sandro brouht up a good argument:
> 
> After my elaboration that in principle relation to RDF mappings could in
>   most cases be achieved by combining/extending SQL+SPARQL to a common
> language for views, we see no obstable that RIF could serve as a basis
> here.
> 
> RIF BLD [1] as a rules language can both express relations (n-ary
> predicates, optionally with named parameters common to DB relations), as
> well as RDF by frames [2]. In that sense RIF itself could serve as a
> basis for an RDB2RDF mapping language and should be mentioned in the
> liaisons.
> 
> I can give some overview over RIF in one of the next telecons.
> 
> best,
> Axel
> 
> 1. http://www.w3.org/TR/rif-rdf-owl/
> (latest wiki snapshot: http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/SWC)
> 2.http://www.w3.org/TR/rif-bld/
> (latest wiki snapshot: http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/BLD)
> 
> ashok malhotra wrote:
>> I formatted the document we created at the f2f in W3C style.  Attached.
>> Let's discuss this on Wednesday.
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> W3C <http://www.w3.org/>
>>
>>
>>   Recommendation from the RDB2RDF XG
>>
>>
>>     01 November 2008
>>
>> This version:
>>     http://www.w3.org/XG_Recommendation/2008/RDB2RDF_XG-20081101 
>> Latest version:
>>     http://www.w3.org/XG_Recommendation/RDB2RDF_XG Authors:
>>     Ashok Malhotra (editor), Oracle
>>     Members of the RDB2RDF XG, Various affiliations
>>
>> Copyright  2008 W3C <http://www.w3c.org>. All rights reserved. This 
>> document is available under the W3C Document License 
>> <http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2002/copyright-documents-20021231>. 
>> See the W3C Intellectual Rights Notice and Legal Disclaimers 
>> <http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2002/ipr-notice-20021231#Copyright> 
>> for additional information.
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>     Abstract
>>
>> This is the final recommendation from the RDB2RDF XG. The XG 
>> recommends that the W3C initiate a WG to standardize a language for 
>> mapping Relational Database schemas into RDF and OWL.
>>
>>
>>     Status of this Document
>>
>> /This section describes the status of this document at the time of its 
>> publication. Other documents may supersede this document. A list of 
>> current W3C publications can be found in the W3C technical reports 
>> index <http://www.w3.org/TR/> at http://www.w3.org/TR/./
>>
>> This is the final recommendation from the RDB2RDF XG.
>>
>>
>>     Table of Contents
>>
>> 1 Recommendation <#recommendation>
>>     1.1 Liaisons <#IDABRIP>
>>     1.2 Starting Points <#IDAHRIP>
>> 2 References <#References>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>     1 Recommendation
>>
>> The RDB2RDF XG recommends that the W3C initiate a WG to standardize a 
>> language for mapping Relational Database schemas into RDF and OWL. 
>> Such a standard will enable the vast amounts of data stored in 
>> Relational databases to be published easily and conveniently on the 
>> Web. It will also facilitate integrating data from separate Relational 
>> databases and adding semantics to Relational data.
>>
>> The mapping language should be complete regarding when compared to to 
>> the relational algebra. It should have a human-readable syntax as well 
>> as XML and RDF representations of the syntax for purposes of discovery 
>> and machine generation. The output of the mapping will be defined in 
>> terms of an RDFS/OWL schema.
>>
>> It should be possible to subset the language for simple applications 
>> such as Web 2.0. This feature of the language will be validated by 
>> creating a library of mappings for widely used apps such as Drupal, 
>> Wordpress, phpBB.
>>
>> [Michael Haussenblas will help with creating test cases].
>>
>> The mapping language will allow customization with regard to names and 
>> data transformation. In addition, the language must be able to expose 
>> vendor specific SQL features such as full-text and spatial support and 
>> vendor-defined datatypes.
>>
>> The final language specification should include guidance with regard 
>> to mapping Relational data to a subset of OWL such as OQL/QL or OWL/RL.
>>
>> The language must allow for a mechanism to create identifiers for 
>> database entities. The generation of identifiers should be designed to 
>> support the implementation of the linked data principlees 
>> http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html'. Where possible, the 
>> language will encourage the reuse of public identifiers for long-lived 
>> entities such as persons and corporations.
>>
>>
>>       1.1 Liaisons
>>
>> The WG must track the evolution of SPARQL and liaise with the DAWG WG 
>> as well as the OWL WG. The WG will also keep in mind the OKKAM work on 
>> identifiers.
>>
>>
>>       1.2 Starting Points
>>
>> The WG will take as its starting point the mapping languages developed 
>> by the D2RQ and Virtuoso efforts.
>>
>>
>>     2 References
>>
>> IETF RFC 3986
>>     Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI): Generic Syntax
>>     <http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt>, T. Berners-Lee, R. Fielding,
>>     L. Masinter. Network Working Group, January 2005. (See
>>     http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt.)
>> IETF RFC 2119
>>     Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels
>>     <http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt>, S. Bradner, Author. Internet
>>     Engineering Task Force, June 1999. (See
>>     http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt.)
> 
> 


-- 
Dr. Axel Polleres
Digital Enterprise Research Institute, National University of Ireland, 
Galway
email: axel.polleres@deri.org  url: http://www.polleres.net/
Received on Friday, 7 November 2008 14:42:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:33:58 GMT