This is a question posted on SO: 
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/77233466/puzzled-about-fusekis-rule-based-reasoner-behavior

We would like to use Fuseki in the following way:


  *   A rule-based reasoner configured with custom rules uses all named graphs 
and adds the results to the union graph.
  *   We can use SPARQL updates to load/update named graphs; this should 
trigger the rule-based reasoner to update the results in the union graph.
  *   We can use SPARQL queries against the union graph or named graphs.
  *
It is unclear how to configure Fuseki to achieve the above; I had tried a 
configuration posted in this SO question but it lacked adequate context:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/77099070/how-to-load-user-defined-rules-in-a-fuseki-configuration

I created a reproducible example with a README that explains what we've done 
and the questions that arise with the use of the Fuseki 4.9.0 API.
https://github.com/NicolasRouquette/fuseki-reasoning-example

The questions are here:

https://github.com/NicolasRouquette/fuseki-reasoning-example#6-lets-run-some-queries
https://github.com/NicolasRouquette/fuseki-reasoning-example#7-check-reasoner-entailments
https://github.com/NicolasRouquette/fuseki-reasoning-example#8-testing-a-sparql-insert-update
https://github.com/NicolasRouquette/fuseki-reasoning-example#9-testing-sparql-delete-update

I realize that we're far from having clarity on using the Fuseki API to achieve 
the above requirements. It is unclear to me whether it would be simpler to 
achieve these requirements using a Fuseki server configuration instead of using 
the API.


Nicolas F. Rouquette
Principal Computer Scientist
Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA 91189
Cell: +1 (626) 639-5282
Email: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> or 
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>


Reply via email to