W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-comments@w3.org > July 2017

Fwd: [w3c/rdf-tests] rdf-capable docker packages - scope for testing automation? (#48)

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2017 20:38:07 +0100
Message-ID: <CAFfrAFovpHDJeNoqwpASTu+oVd06twaCKKqpsOZ6hVoKDaHOtA@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-rdf-comments Comments <public-rdf-comments@w3.org>
I posted this to the RDF testing Community Group, but it seems many of the
right people are subscribed to public-rdf-comments.


p.s. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docker_(software) for b/g re docker

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Dan Brickley <notifications@github.com>
Date: 4 July 2017 at 20:30
Subject: [w3c/rdf-tests] rdf-capable docker packages - scope for testing
automation? (#48)
To: w3c/rdf-tests <rdf-tests@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>, Your activity <

It seems a good number of RDF-oriented tools are now available via Docker.
Has this community given thought to whether this could help with automated
testing, and whether there are any additional community conventions that
might be documented to make that easier?

My original reason for digging around was to see if this would make an easy
way to quickly spin up an RDF-backed site (with sparql etc.) given a
dataset. It seems that this is eminently doable but each package - although
available via docker - has different conventions for loading data. For
that, I don't know if there are any conventions emerging (e.g.
https://www.w3.org/TR/ldp/ )? But in the case of a simple stateless RDF
parser turning inputs into ntriples, maybe it wouldn't take quite so much
work to encapsulate behind a common interface?

An incomplete list of RDF tools I found with a little searching on
hub.docker.com. I didn't look very deeply or distinguish re-packagings from
those dockerized by their maintainers.

   - https://hub.docker.com/r/cnstntn/sem2ls/ (raptor for parsers, roqet
   for sparql, etc.)
   - https://hub.docker.com/r/stain/jena/ (apache jena)
   - https://hub.docker.com/r/inutano/rdf-tools/ (any23, parsers)
   - https://hub.docker.com/r/ioinformatics/neo4j-rdf/ (neo4j rdf)
   - https://hub.docker.com/r/silviodc/cliopatria/ (swi-prolog cliopatria
   incl. parsers, sparql http://cliopatria.swi-prolog.
   org/help/whitepaper.html )
   - https://hub.docker.com/r/subotic/openrdf-sesame/ (sesame - parsers,
   sparql etc)
   - https://hub.docker.com/r/eccenca/adhs/ (rdflib-based sparql endpoint)
   - https://hub.docker.com/r/lyrasis/blazegraph/ (blazegraph db - parsers,
   sparql etc.)
   - https://hub.docker.com/r/nice/ld-docker-stardog/ (stardog db, sparql,
   parsers etc)

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<https://github.com/w3c/rdf-tests/issues/48>, or mute the thread
Received on Tuesday, 4 July 2017 19:38:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:59:52 UTC