Re: Bi-directional mapping (RDF2RDB)

Hi Soeren:
This is an important area but I think we should wait until the WG starts 
and then add this an a requirement.
If we add it to our final report we risk diluting our message.
All the best, Ashok

Sören Auer wrote:
> Hi all,
> as much as I remember we did so far only discuss the mapping from RDB 
> to RDF. In certain settings it might, however, also make sense to be 
> able to update the RDB using SPARUL [1]. This might of course be 
> pretty difficult and not even possible in the general case. In the DB 
> community there is quite some work about updateable views and some 
> DBMS even support them - if our mapping would be able to distinguish 
> between mappings which represent updateable views and those which 
> don't we would get (partial) updateability for free.
> Maybe this is to much to be discussed now in the XG or to be added as 
> a requirement to the recommendation (or shall we?) - but probably 
> worth keeping in mind once a WG was chartered.
> Have a nice weekend everybody,
> Sören
> [1]

Received on Saturday, 10 January 2009 17:27:55 UTC