I've got nothing against DBPedia, although I don't think it's
particularly useful to make a comparison in that way between Virtuoso
and Jena, unless you are ready to do the work to ensure that the actual
resourcing for the two services is the same, forever.
what kind of problems do you see, i have a local Fuseki server running
downloaded nt-Dbpedia datasets, which i regulary actualize.
Where would you be serving this data from? Do you have perhaps employer
backing or other long-term backing for this?
Such a service should be A REFERENCE PUBLIC ENDPOINT run by Jena
Develepoment like Virtuoso runs it with Dbpedia, but Jena Team can take
another dataset ofcourse.
Is there now such a A REFERENCE PUBLIC ENDPOINT running by Jena Team? If
you think, this is not necessary, then ok...
baran
---
A. Soroka
The University of Virginia Library
On Apr 4, 2017, at 9:34 AM, baran...@gmail.com wrote:
This sounds like an interesting idea. Do you have some time to devote
to it? What database are you thinking of serving?
Well, we can take the same as Virtuoso, Dbpedia-dataset, THE BEST would
be EXACTLY the same as Virtuoso to make comparisons, but this is an old
'idea' of mine, here in this listing about 5-6 years old, i think...
thanks, baran
---
A. Soroka
The University of Virginia Library
On Apr 4, 2017, at 4:48 AM, baran...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, 03 Apr 2017 14:54:53 +0200, javed khan
<javedbtk...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi
Why we need fuseki server in semantic web applications. We can run
SPARQL
queries without it, like we do using Jena syntax.
If Fuseki would have had (like Virtuoso) a reference public endpoint
with a well known database, then were no need for such a question...
baran
--
Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
--
Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
--
Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
