- From: (unknown charset) Libby Miller <Libby.Miller@bristol.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 10:48:44 +0000 (GMT)
- To: (unknown charset) JeffZhang <jeffzhang726@yahoo.com.cn>
- cc: (unknown charset) "www-rdf-interest@w3.org" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Personally, I implemented a query language for RDF because I was doing the same kind of api calls over and over again. I was writing JSPs and servlets. I didn't want to have to hand code RDF in XML (or RDF by an API) to create queries. SQL-like query languages like SquishQL, RDFdb's query language RDQL and Algae, query the RDF model but with a relatively simple, familiar, SQL-like syntax. The connection with SQL is purely syntactic; the query is basically a subgraph with bits missing. If you were automating the generation of queries, then RDF/XML would probably be ok, but for humans to create (and read), an SQL-like syntax is easier. Building a query from API calls negates the point of the convenience of a query language. cheers Libby On Fri, 29 Nov 2002, JeffZhang wrote: > > Dear all, > I can not understand why syntaxes of several current rdf query languages are so much different > with the syntax of RDF data. In my opinion, a query is match a pattern(a subgraph with > undetermined values) against the universal(the big graph in knowledge base). Why not use > just a small rdf data set with blank nodes to represent the subgraph? > I think these query languages have more close relation with sql than with rdf model. > > > > Best regards, > > > JeffZhang > jeffzhang726@yahoo.com.cn > 2002-11-29 > > > _________________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > "是IT精英吗?小试牛刀获时尚大奖!" > http://cn.promo.yahoo.com/cgi-bin/udb/u > > >
Received on Friday, 29 November 2002 05:51:08 UTC