- From: Axel Polleres <axel@polleres.net>
- Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 18:03:55 +0100
- To: "Anicic, Darko" <darko.anicic@siemens.com>
- Cc: Emanuele Della Valle <emanuele.dellavalle@polimi.it>, Jean-Paul <jpcalbimonte@delicias.dia.fi.upm.es>, "public-rsp@w3.org" <public-rsp@w3.org>
Darko, you are bringing validity time into the picture, it seems… whereas I understood that the use for time stamps at the moment was mainly meant for transaction time… [1] is that right? If we have use cases that need validity time, I also think intervals make sense (FWIW, we have designed an extension for SPARQL to query validity time intervals [2]). best, Axel 1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temporal_database 2. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1570826811000771 -- Prof. Dr. Axel Polleres Institute for Information Business, WU Vienna url: http://www.polleres.net/ twitter: @AxelPolleres On Dec 12, 2013, at 5:05 PM, "Anicic, Darko" <darko.anicic@siemens.com> wrote: > Hi Jean-Paul, Emanuele and all, > > I like the proposal too, but I would not limit the proposal only to one time stamp. As we discussed before, I find the interval-based definition better, e.g., with startTime and endTime. The startTime may be optional in cases where the point-based timestamp is preferred, e.g., similarly as in [1] - a related approach to the Streaming Linked Data Framework, sent by Emanuele (see #6 in Section Vocabulary from [1]). > > Cheers, > Darko > > [1] http://km.aifb.kit.edu/sites/lodstream/ > > Von: Emanuele Della Valle [mailto:emanuele.dellavalle@polimi.it] > Gesendet: Dienstag, 10. Dezember 2013 11:15 > An: Jean-Paul; Anicic, Darko; public-rsp@w3.org > Betreff: Re: [RSP] Call Minutes > > Hi Jean-Paul, Darko and all, > > I like the proposal. You may want to check out [1] where a similar approach was proposed. We named the graphs o *instantaneous graphs* (shortly iGraphs) and the graph containing the meta data Stream Graph (shortly sGraph). This solution is currently implemented in our Streaming Linked Data Framework [2]. > > GRAPH :sGraphA { > :iGraph-1 :timeStamp "t_1"^^xsd:dateTimestamp . > :iGraph-2 :timeStamp "t_2"^^xsd:dateTimestamp . > … > :iGraph-n :timeStamp "t_n"^^xsd:dateTimestamp . > } > > GRAPH :iGraph-1 {…} > GRAPH :iGraph-2 {…} > > GRAPH :iGraph-n {…} > > Cheers, > > Emanuele > > [1] http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-628/ldow2010_paper11.pdf > [2] http://disi.unitn.it/~themis/publications/iswc13.pdf > > > > On Dec 9, 2013, at 5:07 PM, Jean-Paul <jpcalbimonte@delicias.dia.fi.upm.es> > wrote: > > > Hi, > > The one in [1] is a very generic model proposed by Axel. We agreed to start from it to define the RDF Stream model. > If you see the minutes, you will see we are pointing to something that *might* look like this: > > o :timeStamp "foo"^^xsd:dateTimestamp . GRAPH o { t1, tn} > > We have set an ACTION, that consists in formalizing these ideas in the wiki. It is our homework for next call. But we can surely discuss here as well. > > best regards, > jp > > > > > > 2013/12/9 Anicic, Darko <darko.anicic@siemens.com> > Hi all, > > since I was not present at the last telco, could you please let me know whether the RDF stream model that was discussed actually is the one described as “graph oriented” in [1], or there are some differences in the two? > Cheers, > Darko > > [1] http://www.w3.org/community/rsp/wiki/RDF_Stream_Models > > Von: jean.paul.ik@gmail.com [mailto:jean.paul.ik@gmail.com] Im Auftrag vonJean-Paul > Gesendet: Samstag, 7. Dezember 2013 00:19 > An: public-rsp@w3.org > Betreff: [RSP] Call Minutes > > Hi all, > > Please find in the wiki the minutes of today's call. Next one is on Dec 20th, and is the last for 2013. We will restart in January, the 17th. > > http://www.w3.org/community/rsp/wiki/Telecon_06.12.2013 > > Thanks again for your support. > > Good weekend! > Jean-Paul > > -- > jpcik! > > > > --------------------------------- > I have moved to EPFL, please email me to: > jean-paul.calbimonte@epfl.ch > > > > -- > jpcik!
Received on Thursday, 12 December 2013 17:04:28 UTC