W3C

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. All rights reserved. This document is available under the W3C Document License. See the W3C Intellectual Rights Notice and Legal Disclaimers 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 at http://www.w3.org/TR/.

This is the final recommendation from the RDB2RDF XG.

Table of Contents

1 Recommendation
    1.1 Liaisons
    1.2 Starting Points
2 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, 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, S. Bradner, Author. Internet Engineering Task Force, June 1999. (See http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt.)