W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org > May 2003

Re: Sesame

From: Arjohn Kampman <arjohn.kampman@aidministrator.nl>
Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 11:36:54 +0200
Message-ID: <3ED1E036.9090207@aidministrator.nl>
To: "Shadi Abou-zahra" <shadi@abou-zahra.net>
CC: w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org

Hello Shadi,

I noticed your e-mail to w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org mentioning Sesame. As one
of the main developers of Sesame, I would be happy to answer any
questions concerning Sesame. Please send any e-mails to me directly
<mailto:arjohn.kampman@aidministrator.nl>, as I'm not on the
w3c-wai-er-ig mailing list.


Arjohn Kampman

aidministrator nederland b.v.  - http://www.aidministrator.nl/
prinses julianaplein 14-b, 3817 cs amersfoort, the netherlands
tel. +31-(0)33-4659987  fax. +31-(0)33-4659987

 > hello,
 > while experimenting with different approaches to query EARL results i
 > looked at two implementations:
 > * Inkling - SquishQL based
 >   http://swordfish.rdfweb.org/discovery/2001/10/earl/
 > * Sesame - RQL based
 >   http://sesame.aidministrator.nl
 > even though Sesame seems to be more flexible (finer query granularity
 > possible), i ask myself if the overhead involved in such an approach is
 > justified as i couldn't think of any vital EARL queries that can't be
 > covered using SquishQL. on the other hand it may not be wise to restrict
 > my EARL querying application from the start.
 > anyway, i'm just curious to know if anyone else has experience with any
 > of these implementations and what your thoughts on them regarding EARL
 > queries are.
 > thanks,
 >   shadi
Received on Monday, 26 May 2003 05:36:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:01:34 UTC