- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2009 10:27:14 -0400
- To: Daniel Schwabe <dschwabe@inf.puc-rio.br>
- CC: Sherman Monroe <sdmonroe@gmail.com>, Samur Araujo <samuraraujo@gmail.com>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>, semantic-web@w3.org
Daniel Schwabe wrote: > Kingsley Idehen wrote: >> Daniel Schwabe wrote: >>> Sherman, >>> as another alternative, I urge you to take a look at Explorator [1] >>> (there is a short movie explaining the basic idea, you can also play >>> with the live interface), which can do all of what you said, and more. >>> It provides a more general exploration paradigm, of which the >>> example you give below is only one of the possibilities... >>> >>> Best >>> Daniel >>> [1] http://www.tecweb.inf.puc-rio.br/explorator. >> Daniel, >> >> When you speak to the <http://lod.openlinksw.com> instance, do you >> use SPARQL Protocol or the Faceted Browsing REST API or either >> depending on task ? >> >> I suspect SPARQL protocol, but please confirm. >> > We use the SPARQL protocol, because the code is geared to deal with > any SPARQL endpoint. The only thing we have customize, precisely > because of lack of standardization, is the FTS function. There is > special code to detect when the server is Virtuoso, to use > bif:contains. Other than that, is uses standard constructs. > If I understand it correctly, the Faceted Browsing REST API would not > allow us to issue the kinds of queries we need; as I mentioned in > earlier messages, Explorator is much more than pure faceted browsing. > Did you have anything specific in mind in this regard? Not, just trying to get Explorator and Razorbase into an "Oranges and Oranges" comparison realm, since Razorbase is completely based on the faceted browsing REST API. Kingsley > > Cheers > D. > -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen President & CEO OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Received on Tuesday, 2 June 2009 14:27:51 UTC