- From: Ezzat, Ahmed <Ahmed.Ezzat@hp.com>
- Date: Fri, 14 May 2010 05:55:11 +0000
- To: Juan Sequeda <juanfederico@gmail.com>
- CC: "public-rdb2rdf-wg@w3.org" <public-rdb2rdf-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <3B7AE9BA67C72B4891EF21842246A21C887BC2F535@GVW1097EXB.americas.hpqcorp.net>
I definitely agree with that... Ahmed From: Juan Sequeda [mailto:juanfederico@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 10:53 PM To: Ezzat, Ahmed Cc: public-rdb2rdf-wg@w3.org Subject: Re: Images of RDB2RDF options updated Ahmed, I agree that Option 1 is a subset of Option 2. However Option 1 tackles the specific case when no domain ontology is involved. However, we can just use two images (Option 2 and Option 3) and explicitly state that in Option 2 there is a possibility of just generating the Local Ontology and not involving the domain ontology. That is fine by me. What does everybody else think? Juan Sequeda +1-575-SEQ-UEDA www.juansequeda.com<http://www.juansequeda.com> On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 12:35 AM, Ezzat, Ahmed <Ahmed.Ezzat@hp.com<mailto:Ahmed.Ezzat@hp.com>> wrote: Juan, It sounds like the three options images are the same image? I missed the last meeting and what was discussed. In your list, Option-1 is a special case of Option-2; I questions its value but we can leave it as a special case of Option-2 in your current list. I suggest: 1. Local Ontology mapping + local-to-domain Ontology mapping * Local Ontology mapping only (option) 2. DB Schema to Domain ontology direct mapping If you look at many current products they typically use option-1 above. Ahmed Ahmed K. Ezzat, Ph.D. HP Fellow, Strategic Innovation Architecture Manager, Business Intelligence Software Division Hewlett-Packard Corporation 11000 Wolf Road, Bldg 42 Upper, MS 4502, Cupertino, CA 95014-0691 Office: Email: Ahmed.Ezzat@hp.com<mailto:Ahmed.Ezzat@hp.com> Off: 408-447-6380 Fax: 1408796-5427 Personal: Email: AhmedEzzat@aol.com<mailto:AhmedEzzat@aol.com> Tel: 408-253-5062 Fax: 408-253-6271 From: public-rdb2rdf-wg-request@w3.org<mailto:public-rdb2rdf-wg-request@w3.org> [mailto:public-rdb2rdf-wg-request@w3.org<mailto:public-rdb2rdf-wg-request@w3.org>] On Behalf Of Juan Sequeda Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 9:18 PM To: public-rdb2rdf-wg@w3.org<mailto:public-rdb2rdf-wg@w3.org> Subject: Images of RDB2RDF options updated Hi Everybody Ted and I have updated the images that depict the three different RDB2RDF options. [1] Option 1: Direct Mapping (no domain ontology involved [2] Option 2: Direct Mapping + Ontology to Ontology Mapping [3] Option 3: Database to Ontology Mapping (no visible local ontology Please note that the current Option 3 was the old Option 2 (and vice-versa) Let me know if there are questions Cheers [1] http://userweb.cs.utexas.edu/~jsequeda/rdb2rdf/RDB2RDF_Option_1.jpg [2] http://userweb.cs.utexas.edu/~jsequeda/rdb2rdf/RDB2RDF_Option_2.jpg<http://userweb.cs.utexas.edu/~jsequeda/rdb2rdf/RDB2RDF_Option_1.jpg> [3] http://userweb.cs.utexas.edu/~jsequeda/rdb2rdf/RDB2RDF_Option_3.jpg<http://userweb.cs.utexas.edu/~jsequeda/rdb2rdf/RDB2RDF_Option_1.jpg> Juan Sequeda +1-575-SEQ-UEDA www.juansequeda.com<http://www.juansequeda.com>
Received on Friday, 14 May 2010 05:58:01 UTC