W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > March 2016

LinkedMDB dump?

From: Nandana Mihindukulasooriya <nmihindu@fi.upm.es>
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2016 09:04:30 +0100
Message-ID: <CAAOEr1=1WY6OnOpxEuW8-E9cMm1Q7LezV0jG3O+WmDACca_R=g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Wouter Beek <w.g.j.beek@vu.nl>
Cc: Jean-Claude Moissinac <jean-claude.moissinac@telecom-paristech.fr>, Luca Matteis <lmatteis@gmail.com>, Pierre-Antoine Champin <pierre-antoine.champin@liris.cnrs.fr>, Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>, Paul Groth <p.groth@elsevier.com>
Hi Wouter,

Thanks for starting this discussion. IMHO, this is a common practical issue
I've faced several times.

On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 8:20 AM, Wouter Beek <w.g.j.beek@vu.nl> wrote:
>
>   - Datadumps are inferior to LDF (no triple pattern queries) but superior
> to SPARQL endpoints (all data can be retrieved).  They are also superior to
> LDF for the singular use case of obtaining all the data.
>

Aren't data dumps - Inferior to both LDF and SPARQL service endpoints in
querybility but superior to both LDF and SPARQL endpoints for obtaining all
data with one click downloads.

In LDF, a constract query with the simple pattern {?s ?p ?o}, can't I get
all data with paging? However, this means that I need to have a LDF client
(can I use the browser client to store this data locally? ).

I also wonder whether implentors of SPARQL services did thought of
providing (may be non-standard) way to handle this special case.

Best Regards,
Nandana
Received on Friday, 11 March 2016 08:05:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 11 March 2016 08:05:03 UTC