W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > July 2007

Re: Named Graph Serialisation (add to publishing linked data document?)

From: Giovanni Tummarello <g.tummarello@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 12:19:49 +0100
Message-ID: <210271540707260419w70b54e67rffca66815f56d639@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Chris Bizer" <chris@bizer.de>
Cc: P.L.Coetzee <P.L.Coetzee@open.ac.uk>, semantic-web@w3.org

Hi Chris..

its just a suggestion really.. the document is great in addressing how
to publish linked data on the web, i was just thinking that many
publishers of major databases have express the need for publishing
dumps so not to be full recrawled. So they need serialization of quads
and might wonder how to do it.  It would probably be beneficial to
have this issue in as an integral part of the publishing. Or a simple
list of known formats and proposals .. or ..  they can find it around
of course :-)
just my20c (irish price)
Giovanni


On 7/26/07, Chris Bizer <chris@bizer.de> wrote:
> Hi Giovani,
>
> within the Linked Data tutorial we wanted to focus on Linked Data
> only.
>
> Therefore, we did not write anything about dumps, SPARQL endoints,
> RDFa, GRDDL, microformats and alike.
> All these things are important, but the topic of our tutorial was
> Linked Data.
>
> I also clearly appriciate your work on trying to bring all this
> different publication forms together.
>
> Cheers
>
> Chris
>
>
> --
> Chris Bizer
> Freie Universitšt Berlin
> Phone: +49 30 838 54057
> Mail: chris@bizer.de
> Web: www.bizer.de
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Giovanni Tummarello" <g.tummarello@gmail.com>
> To: "Chris Bizer" <chris@bizer.de>
> Cc: "P.L.Coetzee" <P.L.Coetzee@open.ac.uk>; <semantic-web@w3.org>
> Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2007 12:43 PM
> Subject: Re: Named Graph Serialisation (add to publishing linked data
> document?)
>
>
> Chris i think this issue is VERY important for publishing linked data
> in general.
>
> Would it make sense that you add a chapter to your publishing linked
> data document called "providing a dump" and list these alternatives?
> (and others that might come?)
> If it does, please do :-)
>
> i think spiders can then find out by themselves what format it is.. as
> long as there is somehow a list of those "generally recognized"
>
> thanks
> Giovanni
>
>
> On 7/26/07, Chris Bizer <chris@bizer.de> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Hi Peter,
> >
> > there is also TriG. See
> > http://sites.wiwiss.fu-berlin.de/suhl/bizer/TriG/
> >
> > TriG is a plain text format for serializing Named Graphs and RDF
> > Datasets.
> > The TriG syntax offers a compact and readable alternative to the
> > XML-based
> > TriX syntax.
> > TriG is roughly Turtle, extended with
> >
> >   a.. '{' and '}' to group triples into multiple graphs and
> >   b.. to precede named graphs by their names
> >   c.. optional :- graph naming operator
> > TriG is implemented by NG4J which works together with Jena and by
> > Sesame. So
> > you can use the syntax together with both frameworks.
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> > --
> > Chris Bizer
> > Freie Universitšt Berlin
> > +49 30 838 54057
> > chris@bizer.de
> > www.bizer.de
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "P.L.Coetzee" <P.L.Coetzee@open.ac.uk>
> > To: <semantic-web@w3.org>
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2007 5:49 PM
> > Subject: Named Graph Serialisation
> >
> >
> >
> > Dear all,
> >
> > I have a fairly large set of data persisted in a quad-store,
> > consisting of a
> > set of named graphs within a single dataset. Other than TRiX, I've
> > yet to
> > come across any 'accepted' means of seralising the graphs into a
> > single RDF
> > dump (ideally which could be read in without massive memory
> > overhead, such
> > as can be easily done with N-Triples).
> >
> > The obvious solution to me would be a sort of 'N-Quadruples',
> > whereby one
> > serialises the Graph URI as the first element per line, followed by
> > the
> > usual S-P-O triple pattern of N-Triples. This seems like the
> > simplest
> > solution (in terms of ease of implementation, readability, as well
> > as for
> > any future processing on the set). What are the list's thoughts on
> > such an
> > approach; is there any prior art that I'm missing, other standards
> > that can
> > achieve the same goals that etc?
> >
> > Thanks in advance for your thoughts!
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Peter
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Received on Thursday, 26 July 2007 11:19:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 07:41:58 UTC