[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Amazon vs. IBM: Big Blue meets match in battle for t

To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: John F Sowa <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 17:42:52 -0400
Message-id: <51F04A5C.1010309@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Kingsley and Ray,    (01)

That's a good two-sentence summary:    (02)

> SPARQL (relational property/predicate graphs) and SQL (relational
> tables) complement one another in powerful ways. Sadly, the tendency is
> to think of SPARQL as a "rip and replace" alternative for SQL which
> drives a majority of the worlds database driven solutions.    (03)

If the SW champions would say that, I would have no quarrel with them.    (04)

> SW in the past decade has been more about academe chest thumping than
> establishing foundations on which to leverage.    (05)

That's a good one-sentence summary.    (06)

> The Ontolog persons and forums will turn this around in the
> near future (my forecast and wishes).    (07)

But we need more than wishes.    (08)

> 1. http://bit.ly/1cucOlE -- Conceptual Graphs as a DBMS Interface (John Sowa 
>circa. 1976 paper).
> 2. http://bit.ly/YTdz3N -- Unified View of Data (Peter Chen circa., 1976 
> 3. http://bit.ly/18zEZQl -- QUEL (from Ingres Implementation White Paper 
>circa., 1976)
> 4. http://bit.ly/17Dkykk -- Criticisms of SQL by Codd (1983).    (09)

Thanks for finding PDFs of those papers.  The fourth one is actually
by Chris Date, but he joined Ted Codd to form the Codd & Date consulting
group.  So it is a good summary of what they both were saying.    (010)

Those papers illustrate the kinds of directions that were actively
being debated 30+ years ago.  Unfortunately, Oracle implemented
an early version of SQL, which incorporated the worst features.
QUEL was a much better language than SQL, and it could have
provided a better foundation for the future.    (011)

The VLDB Conferences (Very Large Databases) and related journals
published excellent research during the 1980s and 90s.  But certain
companies I shall not name prevented any of it from getting into
the ISO standards and the mainstream DB products.    (012)

We need to integrate and build on the best aspects of all the
approaches.  That's what Tim B-L proposed, not what the DAML
project did.    (013)

John    (014)

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    (015)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>