- From: Alex Miller <alexdmiller@yahoo.com>
- Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 14:05:40 -0700 (PDT)
- To: Juan Sequeda <juanfederico@gmail.com>, Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>, public-rdb2rdf-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <303632.55884.qm@web32504.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Thanks! I think this is largely correct. I was working on simple examples myself but you've done a lot more than I have. :) ________________________________ From: Juan Sequeda <juanfederico@gmail.com> To: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>; Alex Miller <alexdmiller@yahoo.com>; public-rdb2rdf-wg@w3.org Sent: Mon, July 26, 2010 3:51:24 PM Subject: D2RQ and Revelytix semantics Hi Richard, Alex and all I took the liberty of analyzing D2RQ and Revelytix mapping language and compare it to the semantics that Marcelo and I have defined in Datalog [1]. (BTW, Marcelo defined the semantics of Datalog in the wiki also!) Marcelo and I are still working on this so you can see a draft of what we are doing in the following google doc (once we are done, we will put it on the wiki.... tables in the wiki are a pain!) https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1APTqD2lJLRjwV6gmPKqDRqC3aT8bozHF0udIXndMNWQ Please forgive me if I butchered the mapping language. Quick conclusion: - Both mapping languages are very similar - Both mapping languages have the semantics established as Database-Instance-and-Schema Mapping [1] (there is a definition of Classes and Properties). There is no way to formally prove this because both languages don't have existing defined semantics (right?) - Revelytix language has different ways of saying the same thing for sake of query optimization ( right?). (I personally believe this is something we should avoid. Language and implementation details should be separate... just look at SQL) Looking forward to Alex's presentation tomorrow! [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/wiki/Database-Instance-Only_and_Database-Instances-and-Schema_Mapping Juan Sequeda +1-575-SEQ-UEDA www.juansequeda.com
Received on Monday, 26 July 2010 21:06:14 UTC