- From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
- Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2012 16:19:59 +0100
- To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
- CC: public-prov-wg@w3.org
On 07/08/2012 14:38, Ivan Herman wrote: > Isn't it possible to express the constraints with SPARQL ASK (using filters inside)? Those would return TRUE or FALSE at the query, that may do the trick... > >> Although I am not native with SPIN, I don't think SPIN rules [1] are >> necessarily restricted to a particular product, it is based on SPARQL, >> just generating new 'Invalid' statements when something is wrong. >> Could you not just run a SPARQL query to find validations afterwards? >> Paul? > > Well, as far as I know > > - In SPIN one has to convert SPARQL statements into RDF, which makes it fairly unreadable in my view (and I do not think that would be helpful for us) > - SPIN has additional object-oriented-like features (?this, constructors, etc) which sound very useful indeed but (a) require a specific processor to run them and (b) I am not sure they are needed for us. > > That is why I am, at this moment, more in favour of keeping to pure SPARQL. FWIW, you might be able to hack up some tests fairly quickly using my ASQC client: https://github.com/gklyne/asqc. Also at http://pypi.python.org/pypi/asqc/0.1.3 (though probably not the very latest version). It's still a bit rough in places, but it's worked for me on a couple of occasions to do some quick-and-dirty SPARQLing. (The SPARQL heavy lifting here is done using rdflib.) #g -- >> >> [1] http://www.w3.org/Submission/spin-modeling/ >>
Received on Tuesday, 7 August 2012 15:20:40 UTC