- From: Andrea Chiodi (E-mail) <andrea.chiodi@mail.inet.it>
- Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 11:53:29 +0100
- To: <www-rdf-rules@w3.org>
Hi. Apologies if I'm not catching the topic correctly (I've no time to read carefully all the newsgroup mails). I wrote some code in Jena to express a query as an RDF graph and to send it to remote query processor that executes it. Instead of "SELECT ?a,?b ... WHERE ... USING", I write a rdf:description of the query, saying "there is a query having a select with 2 variables, named a,b, this WHERE clause, etc ...". The receiving processor interprets the description of the query, composes a regular SELECT clause, and executes it. The answer also is returned as a rdf:description, saying: "this is the answer to such a query, it was composed this way, it consists in a result set with n results, with the given variables bound to these values, ....." Such a description helps me to realize some additional service, like: - add other parameters to the query, not allowed by the SELECT syntax - store the query for subsequent reuse - identify the query (with a URI) as an existing 'desire' of somebody - reason about the query (e.g. splitting it in subqueries) As a ?side? effect, the query itself now is a resource in the semantic web, so I could have another query looking for (a query looking for something). A good tool for sellers, isn't? :-) The experiment works pretty good, and I would like to compare it with other similar experiments. ? Is it in the topic of this thread? (again apologies if it isn't) ? There exist some running activity on this approach in represesenting queries ? Could you inform me about that ? Thanks --------------------------------------- Andrea Chiodi (andrea.chiodi@mail.inet.it) > -----Messaggio originale----- > Da: www-rdf-rules-request@w3.org > [mailto:www-rdf-rules-request@w3.org]Per conto di Libby Miller > Inviato: giovedi 16 gennaio 2003 18.06 > A: Jos De_Roo > Cc: www-rdf-rules@w3.org > Oggetto: Re: RDF query testcases? > > > > > hi Jos! > > So, looking at > > http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/ > > and particularly the questions like > > http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/gedcom-query.n3 > > you're using n3 to describe an RDF graph and _interpreting_ > the graph as a query, is that right? like Pat Hayes said I think - an > RDF graph with a question-mark at the end? So the graph means > something > different - a question, rather than a set of statements. > > I like this approach very much for testing especially (though I'd use > N-triple rather than N3, there's not a big difference for something > like this I don't think). The only issue I can see is that queries > (although rarely in my experience) could have blank predicates, anbd > predicates can't be bnodes in RDF as far as I know. Do you think this > matters? > > For the results, cleverer backends might produce more results in for > the same query, and we'd have to take this into account for describing > the results. > > cheers, > > Libby > > > > On Thu, 16 Jan 2003, Jos De_Roo wrote: > > > > > Hi Libby! > > > > good question; it seems to us that a query is simply > > a set of triples where bnodes play the role of variables > > we then basically can apply a resolution process > > > > [[[ > > The resolution process starts with a query. A query is a tripleset. > > The query will be matched against the triplesets of the initial > > graph G and against the rules. The set unifies with a rule when > > one of the triples of the set unifies with the consequent of the > > rule. The set unifies with another set if all triples in the set > > unify with a triple of the other set. This can possibly be done > > in different ways. The result of the unification of two triple > > sets is a list of substitutionlists. > > ]]] > > > http://www.agfa.com/w3c/2002/02/thesis/An_inference_engine_for > _RDF.html > > and this is work done by Guido Naudts in his master thesis > > > > we also have some running code at http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/ > > and some testcases starting at http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/etc5 > > > > but there's still a lot to do... > > > > -- , > > Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/ > > > > > > > > Libby Miller > > <Libby.Miller@bris To: > www-rdf-rules@w3.org > > tol.ac.uk> cc: > public-esw@w3.org > > Sent by: Subject: > RDF query testcases? > > www-rdf-rules-requ > > est@w3.org > > > > > > 2003-01-16 12:40 > > AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi all > > > > We have some effort in SWAD-Europe [1] to write a document about RDF > > query [see [2]]. Part of this will be FAQ-based - a start > is here [3], > > (and I'd be grateful for any FAQs or answers). > > > > The main reason for sending this message it because I've > chatted to a > > few people who feel that a collection of RDF query > testcases would be a > > useful thing to have, and I can put some effort into this - > maybe as a > > minimum, finding out what's already available, and maybe > look into some > > ways of enabling one query language implementation to use another's > > testcases. > > > > So, would anyone out there like to share their test and their > > experiences of writing them? I can infer that Jena and 4suite have > > them; I think Mozilla has some too. I've got some here for Inkling: > > > > http://swordfish.rdfweb.org/rdfquery/tests/ > > http://swordfish.rdfweb.org/rdfquery/rdf/ > > http://swordfish.rdfweb.org/rdfquery/queries/ > > > > Basically the test scripts read in > > http://swordfish.rdfweb.org/rdfquery/rdf/query-results-manifest.rdf > > > > which specifies the RDF/XML file to pull in, the query to > use and the > > expected number of rows in the resulting table. So it's only a very > > basic test of whether the query engine is functioning. > > > > Any more? Any thoughts? > > > > cheers, > > > > Libby > > > > [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Europe/ > > [2] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Europe/plan/workpackages/live/esw-wp-7.html > [3] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Europe/reports/rdf_ql_comparison_report/ > > > > > > > >
Received on Saturday, 18 January 2003 05:47:45 UTC