- 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