W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-rules@w3.org > January 2003

RE: RDF query testcases?

From: Libby Miller <Libby.Miller@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 10:24:34 +0000 (GMT)
To: Danny Ayers <danny666@virgilio.it>
cc: Jeen Broekstra <jeen.broekstra@aidministrator.nl>, Libby Miller <Libby.Miller@bristol.ac.uk>, www-rdf-rules <www-rdf-rules@w3.org>, Steve Cayzer <Steve_Cayzer@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, mb <mb@picdiary.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0301211022580.1786-100000@mail.ilrt.bris.ac.uk>


yes I really like this idea. I was thinking along these lines because of
a demo that Matt Biddulph has for classifying his photos - although I
can't find the reference - Matt?

thanks very much Jeen for the clarification.

Libby

On Tue, 21 Jan 2003, Danny Ayers wrote:

> This thread has provided the answer to a problem that I've been mulling over
> for a few weeks ;-)
>
> Some blogging tools (such as Movable Type) allow the user to categorise
> their posts, but the categories used are totally arbitrary, just strings
> decided by the user. To be able to index across systems, some sharing of
> taxonomies would be needed. It occurred to me that a lookup of something
> like Wordnet would allow the mapping of Cats (in Danny's blog) to
> http://whatever/worndet#Cat and thence to Cats (in Libby's blog). So it
> looks like pretty much any of these query tools would be up to the job. The
> next stages are I suppose setting the 'dictionary' up as a service, then
> implementing a user-transparent interface.
>
> Cheers,
> Danny.
>
>
> -----------
>
> http://dannyayers.com
>
> "The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne." - Chaucer
>
>
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: www-rdf-rules-request@w3.org
> >[mailto:www-rdf-rules-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Jeen Broekstra
> >Sent: 21 January 2003 10:27
> >To: Libby Miller
> >Cc: www-rdf-rules
> >Subject: Re: RDF query testcases?
> >
> >
> >
> >Libby Miller wrote:
> >
> >> this is great, thanks Jeen.
> >>
> >> quick question: Sesame supports RDF schema right? so if I did a query
> >> in RDQL over Sesame over an ontology like Wordnet (e.g.
> >> http://xmlns.com/wordnet/1.6/Person) would I get both Person and
> >> Life_form as the classes of an instance of Person?
> >
> >Yes.
> >
> >My RDQL is somewhat shaky, but the query would be something like:
> >
> >SELECT ?c
> >WHERE (?p, <rdf:type>, <wn:Person>),
> >       (?p, <rdf:type>, ?c)
> >
> >Right?
> >
> > > What if I did the same query in RQL?
> >
> >The same. In Sesame, the deductive closure is computed independently of
> >the query module, so both RQL and RDQL could retrieve all these answers.
> >
> >The RQL query in this case would be something like:
> >
> >SELECT typeOf( p )
> >FROM   wn:Person { p }
> >
> >The difference is in the fact that RQL can explicitly express certain
> >types of schema semantics in the query, making it possible to express
> >queries about the schema more easily, and sometimes go beyond what's
> >expressible in an RDF-only QL.
> >
> >A simple example of this is direct subclass relations (A is a direct
> >subclass of B iff there is no C: A < C < B): this is a relation that
> >would be rather awkward to express in RDQL, but RQL has a special
> >language feature for it.
> >
> >> I'm asking this because I was asked to recommend a tool that could be
> >> used for querying a fairly simple, heirarchical ontology (actually
> >> more like a thesaurus - MeSH,
> >> http://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/meshhome.html), such that you could, say,
> >> ask for all research groups with 'abdomen' or anything above it in the
> >> heirarchy as their descriptive keyword. (I'm now also wondering whether
> >> things below it in the heirarchy might be more useful...)
> >>
> >> Does that make any sense?
> >
> >This would be fairly straightforward to express, I imagine, so yes :)
> >
> >Best regards,
> >
> >Jeen
> >--
> >jeen.broekstra@aidministrator.nl
> >aidministrator nederland bv - http://www.aidministrator.nl/
> >julianaplein 14b, 3817 cs amersfoort, the netherlands
> >tel. +31-(0)33-4659987, fax. +31-(0)33-4659987
> >
>
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 21 January 2003 05:26:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:53:10 GMT