W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-rdb2rdf@w3.org > November 2008

Re: Initial draft of XG Recommendation

From: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2008 20:33:57 +0000
Message-ID: <49120335.4030402@deri.org>
To: ashok.malhotra@oracle.com
CC: public-xg-rdb2rdf <public-xg-rdb2rdf@w3.org>

I mentioned the progress of RDB2RDB in yesterdays RIF teleconf.
Sandro brouht up a good argument:

After my elaboration that in principle relation to RDF mappings could in 
   most cases be achieved by combining/extending SQL+SPARQL to a common 
language for views, we see no obstable that RIF could serve as a basis 

RIF BLD [1] as a rules language can both express relations (n-ary 
predicates, optionally with named parameters common to DB relations), as 
well as RDF by frames [2]. In that sense RIF itself could serve as a 
basis for an RDB2RDF mapping language and should be mentioned in the 

I can give some overview over RIF in one of the next telecons.


1. http://www.w3.org/TR/rif-rdf-owl/
(latest wiki snapshot: http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/SWC)
(latest wiki snapshot: http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/BLD)

ashok malhotra wrote:
> I formatted the document we created at the f2f in W3C style.  Attached.
> Let's discuss this on Wednesday.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> W3C <http://www.w3.org/>
>   Recommendation from the RDB2RDF XG
>     01 November 2008
> This version:
>     http://www.w3.org/XG_Recommendation/2008/RDB2RDF_XG-20081101 
> Latest version:
>     http://www.w3.org/XG_Recommendation/RDB2RDF_XG 
> Authors:
>     Ashok Malhotra (editor), Oracle
>     Members of the RDB2RDF XG, Various affiliations
> Copyright  2008 W3C <http://www.w3c.org>. All rights reserved. This 
> document is available under the W3C Document License 
> <http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2002/copyright-documents-20021231>. 
> See the W3C Intellectual Rights Notice and Legal Disclaimers 
> <http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2002/ipr-notice-20021231#Copyright> 
> for additional information.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     Abstract
> This is the final recommendation from the RDB2RDF XG. The XG recommends 
> that the W3C initiate a WG to standardize a language for mapping 
> Relational Database schemas into RDF and OWL.
>     Status of this Document
> /This section describes the status of this document at the time of its 
> publication. Other documents may supersede this document. A list of 
> current W3C publications can be found in the W3C technical reports index 
> <http://www.w3.org/TR/> at http://www.w3.org/TR/./
> This is the final recommendation from the RDB2RDF XG.
>     Table of Contents
> 1 Recommendation <#recommendation>
>     1.1 Liaisons <#IDABRIP>
>     1.2 Starting Points <#IDAHRIP>
> 2 References <#References>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     1 Recommendation
> The RDB2RDF XG recommends that the W3C initiate a WG to standardize a 
> language for mapping Relational Database schemas into RDF and OWL. Such 
> a standard will enable the vast amounts of data stored in Relational 
> databases to be published easily and conveniently on the Web. It will 
> also facilitate integrating data from separate Relational databases and 
> adding semantics to Relational data.
> The mapping language should be complete regarding when compared to to 
> the relational algebra. It should have a human-readable syntax as well 
> as XML and RDF representations of the syntax for purposes of discovery 
> and machine generation. The output of the mapping will be defined in 
> terms of an RDFS/OWL schema.
> It should be possible to subset the language for simple applications 
> such as Web 2.0. This feature of the language will be validated by 
> creating a library of mappings for widely used apps such as Drupal, 
> Wordpress, phpBB.
> [Michael Haussenblas will help with creating test cases].
> The mapping language will allow customization with regard to names and 
> data transformation. In addition, the language must be able to expose 
> vendor specific SQL features such as full-text and spatial support and 
> vendor-defined datatypes.
> The final language specification should include guidance with regard to 
> mapping Relational data to a subset of OWL such as OQL/QL or OWL/RL.
> The language must allow for a mechanism to create identifiers for 
> database entities. The generation of identifiers should be designed to 
> support the implementation of the linked data principlees 
> http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html'. Where possible, the 
> language will encourage the reuse of public identifiers for long-lived 
> entities such as persons and corporations.
>       1.1 Liaisons
> The WG must track the evolution of SPARQL and liaise with the DAWG WG as 
> well as the OWL WG. The WG will also keep in mind the OKKAM work on 
> identifiers.
>       1.2 Starting Points
> The WG will take as its starting point the mapping languages developed 
> by the D2RQ and Virtuoso efforts.
>     2 References
> IETF RFC 3986
>     Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI): Generic Syntax
>     <http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt>, T. Berners-Lee, R. Fielding,
>     L. Masinter. Network Working Group, January 2005. (See
>     http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt.)
> IETF RFC 2119
>     Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels
>     <http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt>, S. Bradner, Author. Internet
>     Engineering Task Force, June 1999. (See
>     http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt.)

Dr. Axel Polleres, Digital Enterprise Research Institute (DERI)
email: axel.polleres@deri.org  url: http://www.polleres.net/

Everything is possible:
rdfs:subClassOf rdfs:subPropertyOf rdfs:Resource.
rdfs:subClassOf rdfs:subPropertyOf rdfs:subPropertyOf.
rdf:type rdfs:subPropertyOf rdfs:subClassOf.
rdfs:subClassOf rdf:type owl:SymmetricProperty.
Received on Wednesday, 5 November 2008 20:36:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:39:03 UTC