- From: <editor@content-wire.com>
- Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2007 13:08:47 +0700
- To: "Danny Ayers" <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
- Cc: <semantic-web@w3c.org>
Thanks a lot Danny (leaving the pragmatic side of thing behind for a moment, but it would be interesting also to see how a pragmatic data model would compare to a semantic data model ) I am reading through mails superficially now, just a few quick comments P -----> > ...if you discount Semantic Web technologies ;-) yes - we are still trying to understand the practical applications of those (semijoke) > >> questions: >> >> - other than SIM, prototypes like Hstore and some semantic data wrapper, >> what tools can I use to implement semantic data? > > Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the original notion of semantic > data was the overlay of ontology kind of ideas over an > entity-relationship kind of model. There's been a great deal of work > done since around Description Logics (which offer formalisations of > ontologies) and the Resource Description Framework offers an > entity-relationship model designed for the Web. Put these together, > with a few other bits and pieces and you have Semantic Web > technologies. I am trying to understand what work I need to look up... still reading > >> - when modelling data, usually we follow standard 'data modelling' >> methods >> based on relational data model. what parts of our methods do we have to >> upldate to develop semantic data model? > > Depends how semantic you want to get. How semantic do I need to get? Assume I want to get totally semantic (even pragmatic, after we know what that is exactly) Down at the RDF level, you can > just normalise the data down to binary relations (and name the > relations with URIs). This can be done as a view of the relational > data. The SPARQL query language can be used on such data, and because > of the use of URIs as identifiers it's inherently Web-friendly. sounds good - assume I have all my enterprise data stored in a standard RDBMS which tool can I use to 'normalise the data to binary relations' (and what form would that be?) Also, I am under the impression that SDM require a degree of de-normalisation (allowing for derived data) but normalisation down to binary sounds like highly normalised can you explain that Do you have access to this paper? I cant seem to get it from my ACM connection here: Normal Forms and Reduction for Theories of Binary Relations I think from what I understand so far that SDM extends RDM with additional properties that are also shared with OODM, but I have not studied how semantic technologies should be used to be applicable with normal datasets > If you want more sophisticated reasoning over the data, you'll need to > find or create OWL ontologies in which your data fits. I see. I think that semantic data models requires an ontology to be deployed, but I would not want to rescrict ontology to owl as we have it now, as I think owl may be extended at some stage Id like to have an ontology that is owl independent. but I guess thats what you mean (I guess you say ontology=owl while I say ontology= any KRL) > >> - As a project manager in charge of making sure that my organisation's >> data >> model is 'semantic enabled' what should I absolutely make sure of? > > Depends what you want to do with the data. I'd suggest exposing an RDF > view of the data, reusing existing RDF schemas/ontologies wherever > possible. See the specs listed at: > > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/ > > also: > > http://sites.wiwiss.fu-berlin.de/suhl/bizer/pub/LinkedDataTutorial/ > > To make it useful internally, you may want to check out some of the > available tools, e.g. at: > > http://www.mkbergman.com/?page_id=325 > http://sites.wiwiss.fu-berlin.de/suhl/bizer/toolkits/ > http://planetrdf.com/guide/ thanks a lot Danny - I am collecting points of view at the moment most useful best pdm > Cheers, > Danny. > > -- > > http://dannyayers.com
Received on Friday, 28 December 2007 06:03:03 UTC