Hello John, (01)
here is an interview about what Oracle does with RDF, OWL and SPARQL. They
seem to be quite satisfied: (02)
Part 1: http://www.w3.org/QA/2013/05/interview_oracle_on_semantic_w.html
Part 2: http://www.w3.org/QA/2013/05/interview_oracle_on_semantic_w_1.html (03)
Regards, (04)
Michael Brunnbauer (05)
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 09:33:24AM -0400, John F Sowa wrote:
> On 5/31/2013 7:28 AM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
> > Blank nodes and statement reification are powerful concepts that have
> > been maligned (in the RDF realm) due to poor understanding their utility
> > etc..
>
> That is one of my complaints about RDF. It is closely related to
> the complaints by Tim Bray, who worked with Guha to define RDF, and
> by Pat Hayes, who worked with Guha to define the semantics of RDF in
> a way that is compatible with Common Logic:
>
> 1. The hackers took over RDF, ignored its logical foundations,
> and stuffed anything they could think of into the nooks and
> crannies of the angle brackets.
>
> 2. As a result, all attempts to teach RDF spread more ignorance
> than enlightenment.
>
> KI
> > I tend to use the function of the pronoun (noun and noun phrase
>substitution)
> > in natural language grammar to exemplify the blank node function.
>
> My recommendation is to treat RDF like assembly language. Nobody
> should ever use it except system programmers who develop compilers
> from high-level languages that compile into RDF. When you do that,
> nobody but compiler writers would ever see the blank nodes.
>
> By high-level languages, I do *not* mean N3 and Turtle -- or even
> SPARQL. As an example of a logic-based HLL for databases, I suggest
> Datalog, which can be used as a query language for relational or graph
> DBs with equal facility. Datalog can also state constraints, views,
> and rules and perform inferences from them.
>
> But I would recommend even higher-level languages than Datalog.
> There was excellent R & D by both the DB and the AI communities
> from the 1980s to 2000. Tim B-L's DAML proposal for the Semantic
> Web in Feb 2000 took into account a very large fraction of that
> research. But only a tiny amount made it into the final DAML
> report of 2005 -- just OWL and SPARQL.
>
> You can't expect a five-year project to do everything. But 8 years
> have gone by, and the research has stagnated. They haven't even
> looked at their original charter (Tim's 2000 proposal) to see what
> they failed to implement. It's pitiful.
>
> John
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
> To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
> (06)
--
++ Michael Brunnbauer
++ netEstate GmbH
++ Geisenhausener Straße 11a
++ 81379 München
++ Tel +49 89 32 19 77 80
++ Fax +49 89 32 19 77 89
++ E-Mail brunni@xxxxxxxxxxxx
++ http://www.netestate.de/
++
++ Sitz: München, HRB Nr.142452 (Handelsregister B München)
++ USt-IdNr. DE221033342
++ Geschäftsführer: Michael Brunnbauer, Franz Brunnbauer
++ Prokurist: Dipl. Kfm. (Univ.) Markus Hendel (07)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J (08)
|