- From: Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>
- Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 18:02:53 +0000
- To: <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>
- CC: Sören Auer <auer@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>, public-xg-rdb2rdf <public-xg-rdb2rdf@w3.org>, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Ashok, All, Let me clarify my position here: it should of course go into the XG report as to not 'lose' any of our thoughts here; however, maybe it is wiser not to push it too far and directly put it into the charter, yes, here we seem to agree. Cheers, Michael -- Dr. Michael Hausenblas DERI - Digital Enterprise Research Institute National University of Ireland, Lower Dangan, Galway, Ireland, Europe Tel. +353 91 495730 http://sw-app.org/about.html > 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> > Subject: Re: Bi-directional mapping (RDF2RDB) > Resent-From: <public-xg-rdb2rdf@w3.org> > Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 17:58:12 +0000 > > > 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 18:03:35 UTC