- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2012 15:00:46 -0400
- To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <5037CF5E.7090308@openlinksw.com>
On 8/24/12 2:00 PM, Richard Cyganiak wrote: > On 24 Aug 2012, at 12:32, Kingsley Idehen wrote: >> How would you map g-box, g-snap, and g-text in formal relational DBMS terminology? Such a mapping would help many. Basically, mapping to relations, sets of tuples, and notation. > The SQL spec calls them: > > g-box: "site" or "variable" (e.g., a base table is a site that can hold an instance of a table value) Here relational database products muddied the waters a little. You have a Table being a Relation. A database being a collection of Relations (really a system capable of managing one of more Relations). Tables can be denoted by Names, so you end up with a Database with many tables. Back in the day, desktop databases like FoxPRO, DBASE, Paradox etc.. treated the Database and the Table as one i.e., they used either term to denote Relations. > > g-snap: "value" (e.g., the state of a base table at any given time is a "table value") Yes. > > g-text: "SQL-statement", composed of various kinds of "expressions" Yes. Sandro: RDF is specific about the tuples being 3-tuples. Its also adds an intensional (open world) dimension rather than being extensional (closed world), solely. Thus, the differences between the relational DBMS realm and RDF aren't as wide many assume. This is why mapping terminology to existing relational terminology is ultimately a good thing for RDF re. mass appreciation, comprehension, and adoption. Kingsley. > > Probably doesn't help too much. > > Best, > Richard > -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen Founder & CEO OpenLink Software Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Received on Friday, 24 August 2012 18:59:13 UTC