- From: Ben Adida <ben@adida.net>
- Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2006 16:05:55 -0400
- To: semantic-web@w3.org
Elias, Max, In the RDF-in-HTML task force, we've focused mostly on "how to publish RDF in an HTML page," and we will probably not address this storage issue directly, as it depends on many other moving parts (like SPARQL). That said, I see two different cases to consider, depending on your situation: 1) a structured/semantic data source is authoritative Think of either a SQL or Triple backend, where the contents are rendered as XHTML via some application. Then your SPARQL engine would run off this backend, and the XHTML+RDFa becomes just another serialization of the RDF: it gets rendered from this backend just like a normal database-backed web application, with XHTML for humans to interpret. 2) the XHTML itself, or some closely related markup, is authoritative This is the case for a semantic wiki, or for Creative Commons, or for Queso: the actual authoritative data is XHTML+RDFa (either as standalone pages, or delivered via something like ATOM). Then, if you want to manage raw triples (e.g. for SPARQL), you'll need to extract the triples and store them in a Triple Store (exactly what Elias described). I believe SweetWiki stores both the XHTML+RDFa and the extracted triples. The first is for presentation, the second is extracted from the first and is used for indexing. To put it another way, what do you do with RDF/XML? Either you're publishing RDF/XML from a triple store (or from a SQL backend), in which case you're just serializing triples as RDF/XML, and your storage is just triples. Or, the RDF/XML comes from many different sources and is, for you, the authoritative triple source. You must then extract the raw triples from it if you want to serve them up as SPARQL. The difference is that RDF/XML doesn't give you much more than the raw triples themselves, while XHTML+RDFa also gives you styled, human readability that can't always be re-created from the raw triples. That's why, if it's your authoritative source of data, you'll want to keep the XHTML+RDFa around, but extract and index the triples in parallel for things like SPARQL. If it's just another way for you to serialize your pre-existing triples, then it doesn't need to be integrated into your SPARQL setup. -Ben Elias wrote: > Max, > > At IBM we have been doing some work in the area and we are exploring > possible answers to your questions in Queso [1] > > We give access for read/write via an Atom Publishing Protocol endpoint. > The contents are converted using AtomOWL to RDF (i.e. the entire > contents of the Atom entry XML) and if the content is XHTML, we extract > RDF triples encoded in RDFa and make them available as triples. > > Yes, XML-elements become XMLLiterals, subjects are URIs??? (not sure > what else it could be) and yes it's working great for SPARQL queries. > > -Elias > > > [1] http://torrez.us/archives/2006/07/17/471/ > > Max Völkel wrote: >> Hi RDFa'ers, >> >> I still have a tiny but (to me) important question about RDFa. >> >> First, it seems a great idea that I can annotate my XHTML document >> with RDF, even better, I can annotate each individual element with >> RDF, can make elements being the subject or object of RDF >> statements. Wow. I even can make RDF statements unrelated to >> elements on the page. Wow. >> >> Okay, how do I represent such structures in an API/triple store? >> >> Will the XML-elements become XML-Literals? What for the subjects? >> Are XPointer-expressions usingthe document as their root an >> identifier for subjects? I worry, because I need to represent the >> XML+RDFa somehow in a triple store in order to to e.g. SPARQL >> queries. >> >> Maybe I overlooked something, but I never found this relation >> explained. >> >> Kind regards, >> >> Max Völkel >> -- >> Dipl.-Inform. Max Völkel, Universität Karlsruhe / FZI >> nepomuk.semanticdesktop.org >> voelkel@fzi.de +49 721 9654-854 www.xam.de >> >>
Received on Thursday, 7 September 2006 20:20:53 UTC