Hi Sebastian,

Your project sounds interesting, and it would certainly be cool if
MetaModel can help you in making Cognescent a great solution.

>From the outside it's a little hard for me to digest it all. And in
particular - what parts of your semantic modelling would you need to be
integrated directly in MetaModel vs. what parts do you intend to just use
MetaModel as-is to provide data for?

Kasper


2014-05-08 20:33 GMT+02:00 Sebastian Samaruga <[email protected]>:

> After a while, I've came up with this. I face up transformation using RDF
> as an underlying unifying model of, for example and not limited to:
> Tabular, XML, JSON, and even OLAP data sources as input. Then, perform an
> 'ETL' inference in a Loader layer where I can infer types an so and then
> populate a semantic graph. The idea is the graph is flexible enough to be
> viewed as any of the APIs mentioned in the document (Tabular, Neo4J, XML,
> JSON, etc). Any of this APIs are to be implemented in an ad-hoc manner so
> there is no limit if you need another format. I try to explain the benefits
> of doing things this way in the document, apologizes and let me know if I'm
> wrong.
>
>
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxxuOINjaiBNRER3c3d3NnBaVWs/edit?usp=sharing
>
> Regards,
>
> Sebastian Samaruga.
>
>
> On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Sebastian Samaruga <[email protected]
> >wrote:
>
> > The mapping from tabular to RDF is really straightforward. As RDF data is
> > encoded in triple statements, this triples are in the way Subject,
> > Predicate, Object. A tabular to RDF conversion regards a Subject in the
> > statements as a primary key and the predicates as columns and the objects
> > as cell values. The model is not much different of a key-value store
> with a
> > parent subject. So, for example convert JSON / XML and others is not
> > difficult either.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 2:37 PM, Kasper Sørensen <
> > [email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Sebastian,
> >>
> >> If I understand you correctly you're interested in making a RDP based
> >> adaptor/module for MetaModel? Sounds like a very cool idea... I don't
> know
> >> a lot about RDF but enough to know that it has a lot of potential and
> >> being
> >> able to query it "as any other database" would make a lot of sense for
> >> someone like me :-)
> >>
> >> The big question with MetaModel modules always seem to be: Can the thing
> >> be
> >> mapped to a Table/Column oriented model? If so, we can do it. I think
> RDF
> >> exposes a kind of schema which we could probably map to a table with
> >> columns? Would be great... Can you point to a few good resources on the
> >> schema-model of RDF, then I'd love to come up with more concrete
> feedback.
> >>
> >> Kasper
> >>
> >>
> >> 2014-02-16 22:35 GMT+01:00 Sebastian Samaruga <[email protected]>:
> >>
> >> > Hi everybody,
> >> >
> >> > I've came to MetaModel a while ago and now, when I started development
> >> for
> >> > a Business Intelligence (BI) solution for which I'll use semantic web
> >> > technology I've realized there could be benefits of having my meta
> model
> >> > exposed like a provider for a framework like yours.
> >> >
> >> > Semantics offer lots of advantages modeling data and my solution in
> >> > particular tries to overcome the limitation of having huge amounts of
> >> data
> >> > coming from any data source and in any format Then a meta model is
> >> > populated with all the meta data
> >> > that can be extracted, for example type information from schema less
> >> data
> >> > sources.
> >> >
> >> > The meta model resulting from meta data extraction is maybe flexible
> >> enough
> >> > to transform to other models and this development (currently ongoing
> at
> >> > http://cognescent.googlecode.com) which I'm fully refactoring, could
> >> add
> >> > the layer of indirection needed between the semantic layer (RDF/OWL)
> >> world
> >> > and traditional application schemes built upon a relational model
> (kind
> >> of
> >> > Semantic - ORM).
> >> >
> >> > I don't know if this whole idea is worth thinking about or if it is
> >> > feasible. However I'll try to review MetaModel sources to see if all
> >> this
> >> > fit. I love the way MetaModel proposes integration and the way the API
> >> is
> >> > formed. I also love semantic web and the promising it is so, I would
> be
> >> > glad if I could work in this kind of stuff.
> >> >
> >> > Best Regards,
> >> > Sebastian.
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to