- From: Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>
- Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2010 08:38:06 +0100
- To: Juan Sequeda <juanfederico@gmail.com>
- CC: RDB2RDF WG <public-rdb2rdf-wg@w3.org>
Juan, Thanks and agree - will take this input as an intro for sec 2. [1]. BTW, I might extend the use cases with an example re GoodRelations (assuming a vendor who has products and wants to offer some 'price compare' or the like), which would strengthen 3. and 4. Cheers, Michael [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/use-cases/#uc -- Dr. Michael Hausenblas LiDRC - Linked Data Research Centre DERI - Digital Enterprise Research Institute NUIG - National University of Ireland, Galway Ireland, Europe Tel. +353 91 495730 http://linkeddata.deri.ie/ http://sw-app.org/about.html > From: Juan Sequeda <juanfederico@gmail.com> > Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2010 01:24:36 -0500 > To: RDB2RDF WG <public-rdb2rdf-wg@w3.org> > Subject: Use Cases > Resent-From: RDB2RDF WG <public-rdb2rdf-wg@w3.org> > Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2010 06:25:12 +0000 > > Hey, > > The general (or maybe only) use case is that we want to integrate our RDB > data with other RDF. I think we all agree on that and given the conversation > on Tuesday, this was a major consensus. However, behind that general use > case, there are sub use cases which will explain why we want to integrate > our RDB with RDF. These sub use cases include the following: > > - Source: RDB (obviously) > - Destination: a data source in RDF. > - RDF that comes from structured source (RDB, XLS, CSV, etc) > - Existing RDF that is on the Web > - RDF that comes from unstructured sources (HTML, PDF, etc) > > Why do I make a distinction for the destination? Because I think that in > order to tell a nice use case story, we need to care where the RDF comes > from. And these are the scenarios (stories or use cases): > > 1. I want to integrate my RDB with another structured source (RDB, XLS, > CSV, etc), so I'll convert my RDB to RDF and assume my other structured > source can also be in RDF. > 2. I want to integrate my RDB with existing RDF on the web (linked data), > so I'll convert my RDB to RDF and then I'm able to link and integrate > 3. I want to integrate my RDB with unstructured data (HTML, PDF, etc), so > I'll convert my RDB to RDF and assume my other unstructured source can also > be in RDF. > 4. I'm not interested in integrating my RDB with other sources > (structured, rdf, unstructured). However, I do want to expose my RDB as RDF > because I want semantic web search engines that crawl RDF data to index me > and I want to become a Linked Data hub and let other people link to me. > > Essentially points 1-3 are about integrating RDB with RDF. Point 4 is about > just exposing it. > > This is what Dan and I were trying to explain in [1]. Is this too > controversial? If so, why? If not, then what I propose and would like to do > is have a use case that can tell a story for each of the 4 points. This > could give us full coverage. Going over the Use Cases in [2], I see the > following > > - Integrating enterprise relational database for tax control clearly > demonstrates point 1. > - The RNA use case demonstrates point 2 > - The wordpress use case shows point 4 and we could create another use > case from it in order to show point 3. > > I'm not sure where the other use cases would fit. > > So yes... the general use case is integrating RDB with RDF. But there are > subcases in that general use case and we need to present usecases where > readers feel that they fit in specifically... not just a general RDB2RDF. > > What do y'all think? > > > [1] > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/wiki/Use_Cases_and_Requirements#R2ML_Applica > tion_Use_Case_Requirements > [2] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/use-cases/#uc > > > Juan Sequeda > +1-575-SEQ-UEDA > www.juansequeda.com
Received on Friday, 23 April 2010 07:38:41 UTC