On 10/2/14 4:02 PM, Jürgen Jakobitsch wrote:
hi,when trying to classify the animals on pictures from a recent trip to eastern indonesia meticulously realized that it is very hard if not impossible to branch datasets with ease. while this might sound ignoreable at first sight it might as well be the reason for the giant global graph to develop a culture of duplicating and linking with the end effect of being very close to where we came from (many sql databases).what i mean will hopefully become clear with a simple example : the "manta birostris" (giant oceanic manta ray) is classified her wikipedia.org <http://wikipedia.org> as Kingdom:Animalia Phylum:Chordata Class:Chondrichthyes Subclass:Elasmobranchii Order:Myliobatiformes Suborder:Myliobatidae Family:Mobulidae Genus:Manta Species:Manta birostris here http://www.catalogueoflife.org/col/browse/tree/id/18879368 as Kingdom: Animalia Phylum: Chordata Class: Elasmobranchii Order: Myliobatiformes Family: Myliobatidae Genus: Manta Species: Manta birostris here http://www.marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=browser&id=105755#ct as Kingdom: Animalia Phylum: Chordata Subphylum: Vertebrata Superclass: Gnathostomata Superclass Pisces (Unreviewed) Class: Elasmobranchii (Unreviewed) Subclass: Neoselachii (Unreviewed) Infraclass: Batoidea (Unreviewed) Order: Rajiformes Family: Myliobatidae (Unreviewed) Subfamily: Mobulinae Genus: Manta Species: Manta birostris here http://data.gbif.org/species/2419163/ as Kingdom: Animalia Phylum: Chordata Class: Elasmobranchii Order: Myliobatiformes Family: Myliobatidae Genus: Manta Species: Manta birostrisif only in theory we would triplify all these datasets and link them it still would be very hard to find out what different people think about the actually same being.now:my thinking was to create a flat list of uris for => all <= these classifications and create branches (graphs) with the hierarchies. but it is not as simple as it sounds because i cannot make the sparql engine follow a branch at certain uris and the rejoin the master graph again by whatever means.
You mean that you can't de-reference a SPARQL query pattern variable as part of a SPARQL query processing pipeline?
neither can i do such things on data level.
If the data is in 5-star Linked Open Data form you have the data network in place. Then its about a SPARQL query that crawls the data-network. Ultimately, each entity description document SHOULD end up being an internal triples/quad store document identifier (a/k/a named graph IRI).
Naturally, what I describe above is how Virtuoso will behave is you include input:grab pragmas in your SPARQL.
i was thinking about like so [1] on a triple (quad) level. questions:1. is the problem described so that it is at least semi-understandable (or should i come up with some triples as example)
I think so, but not 100% certain :)
2. has this problem already been dealt with and i was only missing that day (please provide a link)
Sorta, in some other conversations about LOD cloud crawling and SPARQL.
3. has this problem already been solved and i was only missing that
day (please provide a link)
4. do you think it is worth dealing with
(i personally think so [think: scaling cooperation ])
5. would be a of enough interest to create a wg
any pointers and thoughts highly appreciated
wkr turnguard
-- Regards, Kingsley Idehen Founder & CEO OpenLink Software Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Personal Weblog 1: http://kidehen.blogspot.com Personal Weblog 2: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/kidehen Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen Personal WebID: http://kingsley.idehen.net/dataspace/person/kidehen#this
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
