Re: semsheets

Hello everyone,

Besides the framework already citted, I would like to promote the
SPARQL-Generate
tool. <https://ci.mines-stetienne.fr/sparql-generate/>
It is very intuitive to use, as it is built upon SPARQL using constructs,
differently of proprietary syntaxes, and it can be used for mapping from
JSON, CSV, CBOR, geoJSON, HTML, SQL, plain texts (with regular
expressions), Websocket streams (e.g. MQTT), GET operations, and RDF.

Also, about the analogy, it is a very interesting way of looking: CSS is
for HTML just like a mapping tool/language/framework is for (raw)data, as
in both cases we're styling, giving a new representation, to something.
As long as we don't have an unified protocol, such as HTML, for storing
data, in terms of syntaxes, variables, properties, and their nomenclatures,
we won't be able to read data homogeneously, to give data new
representation in a common way.

And, maybe, just maybe, actually, we'll always have different data formats,
taking into account some specificity of the data context, and (I hope not)
different ways of expressing some common qualities of real-world objects,
such as *name_individual *and *nm_individual* by instance...

Best regards,

Em qua., 23 de fev. de 2022 às 07:18, Hans-Jürgen Rennau <hjrennau@gmail.com>
escreveu:

> Hello,
>
> I am interested in the transformation of non-RDF data into RDF data and I
> am puzzled, nay, haunted by a simple analogy. We have stylesheets for
> defining visual representation of data in a convenient, standardized way.
> Could we not have "semsheets" for defining semantic representation of data
> in a convenient, standardized way?
>
> I admit the oversimplification: CSS stylesheets are designed to work with
> HTML, a scope sufficient for practical purposes. Whereas "non-RDF data" is
> by definition a broad spectrum of media types, so the uniformity of a
> single "semsheet language" may not be attainable. But how about approaching
> the goal, based on an appropriate partitioning of data sources? For example:
>
> (1) Relational data
> (2) Tree-structured data
> (3) Other
>
> Tree-structured data comprises most structured data except for graph data
> - JSON, XML, HTML, CSV, .... And concerning "other", what comes to my mind
> is (i) unstructured text and (ii) non-RDF graph data.
>
> So keeping this partitioning in mind, how about standards, frameworks,
> tools enabling customized mapping of data to RDF?
>
> What I am aware of is very little:
>
> (1) relational data: R2RML [1], ?
> (2) tree-structured data: RML [2], ?
> (3) other: ?
>
> Note that I did not mention RDFa, as it is about embedding, rather than
> writing mapping documents, nor GRDDL, as it is about finding a mapping
> document, not its content.
>
> I am convinced that there are quite a few other standards, frameworks and
> tools which should be listed above, replacing the "?".
>
> Can you help me to find them? Any links, thoughts, comments highly
> appreciated. (And should you think the partitioning is faulty, please share
> your criticism. The same applies to the very quest for common, standardized
> mapping languages.)
>
> Thank you! With kind regards,
> Hans-Jürgen Rennau
>
> [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/r2rml/
> [2] https://rml.io/specs/rml/
>


-- 
Gabriel Lopes


*Interoperability as a work-mission and a passion.... How magnificent it is
the possibility to communicate? Words, symbols, consensus,
grammars....Notes. How interoperable are we with the world as it is offered
to our senses? Maybe it depends on our foundations... ?*