W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > November 2000

RE: RDF API convergence? was Re: ANNOUNCE: RDF.NET

From: Jason Diamond <jason@injektilo.org>
Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000 10:46:26 -0800
To: "Dan Brickley" <Daniel.Brickley@bristol.ac.uk>, "www-rdf-interest" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Message-ID: <LAEMKGDBDFAKFNKPFEKLCEGMCMAA.jason@injektilo.org>
Hi, Dan.

This is a good idea although I expect it'll be difficult to come to any sort
of reconcilliation. There are some fundamental differences between the APIs
created so far. There's push vs. pull parsers (SiRPAC vs. RDF.NET's
RDFReader) and statement-centric vs. resource-centric frameworks (Sergey's
RDF API vs. Jena).

Splitting it off into a new list could be your call. Or let the IG members
vote. I'm +0.

I've put up a list of all the known (to me) RDF APIs at [1].



> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org
> [mailto:www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Dan Brickley
> Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2000 4:39 AM
> To: www-rdf-interest
> Subject: RDF API convergence? was Re: ANNOUNCE: RDF.NET
> Very nice :-)
> In the light of this and other implementation activities
> recently announced on www-rdf-interest, I reckon the time is fast
> approaching that we lock various RDF API implementors in a room and
> only let them out when there's a common strawman API.
> Whether that room is a full on W3C Working Group or just an RDF IG
> spin-off mailing list a la www-rdf-logic remains to be
> discussed. Compared to just a year ago, we have RDF implementions
> a-plenty. What we don't know (yet) is how well they can be glued
> together, what different assumptions have been made, and so on.
> My inclination is to spawn a new mailing list, eg. www-rdf-api, with a
> very specific focus: comparision of the existing RDF API proposals. A
> couple of months ago I listed some of these at
> http://www.w3.org/RDF/Interest/ though that list is clearly in need of
> updating. The main RDF IG list is IMHO too busy a place for such a
> discussion. While partitioning discussions is always hard, I reckon in
> this case it would be worth it. As a concrete goal I suggest we aim to
> produce something that might be publishable as a W3C Note, perhaps
> feeding into future WG effort, perhaps simply acting as a useful
> resource for RDF developers. I'm personally having a hard time
> remembering the subtle differences between the different RDF APIs I
> use. Documenting these (not that I'm volunteering!) would in itself be
> hugely useful...
> Opinions? (views from those with running code count double ;-)
> Dan
> On Sat, 11 Nov 2000, Jason Diamond wrote:
> > Hi.
> >
> > I've just uploaded what I hope is the beginning of a comprehensive Open
> > Source RDF Framework written in C#. This release only contains
> the parser
> > and test suite but they will be augmented with classes to
> manipulate models
> > and statements within the coming weeks.
> >
> > http://injektilo.org/rdf/rdf.net.html
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Jason Diamond.
> >
> >
Received on Saturday, 11 November 2000 13:49:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:07:33 UTC