- From: Philippe Duchesne <pduchesne@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2014 09:58:23 +0200
- To: Ricardo Pietrobon <pietr007@gmail.com>
- Cc: public-linked-json@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CAG9URtw=ZjReMfnd_-DND0fzaud7J34y9cA_8baEdaRiYdXwFw@mail.gmail.com>
Hello Ricardo, FWIW, here's my approach for a similar usecase. I have data sitting in a triple store, and I need to bridge it with an existing webapp relying on a legacy JSON object model. I have put together a Java stack with, from bottom to up: - Sesame as a triple store - Jersey as a JAX-RS framework (to expose resources RESTfully) - jsonld-java as a codec layer within jersey - a carefully defined json-ld context and frame that convert triples to my legacy JSON model and back works like a charm so far. This can be ported to most usecases, assuming you can define the proper context, frame, and set of sparql queries to extract statements my 2c, --p. On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 6:38 PM, Ricardo Pietrobon <pietr007@gmail.com> wrote: > I know the topic "mongodb and json-ld integration" has come up a few > times in this list, but our group is trying to make a decision regarding an > ideal architecture and so I thought I would get your input. Here is the > scenario: > > 1. we have a ton of data on mongodb, but now we need to enhance a portion > of it with ontologies (at this point DC, FOAF and bio2rdf/mesh). we will be > relying heavily on sparql to make some inferences > 2. while we could have mongodb side by side with a triple store such as > Allegrograph, it would be easier to keep the whole thing under a single > database > 3. to my knowledge, I can run sparql queries on mongodb using > http://franz.com/agraph/support/documentation/v4/mongo-interface.html but > couldn't find much more on the limitations of this approach > > the questions: > > 1. is the allegro extension above still the best way of bringing json and > json-ld together under mongodb > 2. any other sensible approach that could be attempted here > > this is the short description of my case, I can provide more info if you > would like > > many thanks >
Received on Monday, 1 September 2014 07:58:50 UTC