- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 12:57:32 -0500
- To: ashok.malhotra@oracle.com
- CC: Sören Auer <auer@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>, public-xg-rdb2rdf <public-xg-rdb2rdf@w3.org>
On 1/10/09 12:26 PM, ashok malhotra wrote: > > 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 Ashok, It would certainly pose a distraction, so I agree. But we can add a note that indicates the notion of update-able views isn't lost re. the thinking of the group etc.. Kingsley > > > 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] http://jena.hpl.hp.com/~afs/SPARQL-Update.html >> > > -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen President& CEO OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Received on Saturday, 10 January 2009 17:58:11 UTC