W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > December 2002

RE: why query languages and RDF data have syntaxes?

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 18:38:19 -0500 (EST)
To: Libby Miller <Libby.Miller@bristol.ac.uk>
cc: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>, "'www-rdf-interest@w3.org'" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0212021836230.18773-100000@tux.w3.org>

Graham, do you mean your query that works like RDF with blank bits? I presume
it is easy to map between similar syntax types (squish and algae look the
same to me) but is it easy to map from a "holey-RDF graph query to a
SQL-style one?

(You might be right about it being early to standardise, but it might be
intersting to think about whether that is true and not assume it).



On Mon, 2 Dec 2002, Libby Miller wrote:

>On Sun, 1 Dec 2002, Graham Klyne wrote:
>> FWIW, I think it's too soon to be trying to eliminate diversity in
>> ("standardize") RDF queries.  In practice, I think the various query
>> approaches can be mapped reasonably easily, so I don't think different
>> queries create unbridgeable islands.  My own query mechanism ends up
>> reducing to an SQL-ish kind of approach.
>I'd agree with this Graham - there's a lot of similarity between
>many of the languages. Dan Brickley had some conversion scripts between
>squish and Algae for example (the nearest I can find is this:

Charles McCathieNevile  http://www.w3.org/People/Charles  tel: +61 409 134 136
SWAD-E http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Europe ------------ WAI http://www.w3.org/WAI
 21 Mitchell street, FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia  fax(fr): +33 4 92 38 78 22
 W3C, 2004 Route des Lucioles, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France
Received on Monday, 2 December 2002 18:38:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:07:43 UTC