[Crm-sig] problem of formulating queries is SPARQL it has transferred the old relational paradigm onto the graph structure?
marco.neumann at gmail.com
Thu May 24 14:59:56 EEST 2012
Indeed there is plenty of good stuff going on in the cultural domain
and in many ways it is the seminal moment for our community. SPARQL is
a good tool to expose data via SPARQL endpoints. And even in a LD
conversation the CIDOC CRM is a good orientation and useful
vocabulary. SPARQL and the Semantic Web W3C standards will evolve.
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 7:11 AM, Dominic Oldman
<DOLDMAN at thebritishmuseum.ac.uk> wrote:
> I do understand the concern regarding winning over hearts and minds
> which has been difficult. I think the best way is to provide good sites
> and applications which do the things that museum's have wanted to do for
> a long time. We have CLAROS and other projects and I think there will be
> some very interesting practical developments (we are working on cultural
> data harmonisation and federation) over the summer which will create
> more interest, momentum and some new museum SPARQL Endpoints!
> Dominic Oldman
> Deputy Head of IS
> IS Development Manager
> ResearchSpace Principal Investigator
> British Museum
> +44 (0)20 73238796
> +44 (0)7980 865309
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marco Neumann [mailto:marco.neumann at gmail.com]
> Sent: 24 May 2012 10:59
> To: Dominic Oldman
> Cc: crm-sig
> Subject: Re: [Crm-sig] problem of formulating queries is SPARQL it has
> transferred the old relational paradigm onto the graph structure?
> Dominic, Sebastian,
> I am certainly in favor of a discussion and the development of easy to
> use query forms but that said I am currently equally in favor of
> SPARQL to query RDF data stores.
> Higher level abstractions, BTW any app on top of SPARQL that is, are
> highly desirable. But knowing our "clients" in cultural heritage
> organizations an unqualified statement such as the one made above in
> the paper will further to hamper adoption, I would think. It's like
> critizing SPARQL as the wrong choice for FOL reasoning tasks which are
> not it's primary intended use case. Though SPARQL update is actually a
> very efficient tool to approximate the semantics of such goals.
> On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 5:40 AM, Dominic Oldman
> <DOLDMAN at thebritishmuseum.ac.uk> wrote:
>> Hi Marco,
>> As Sebastian says, we have to use SPARQL. However, just because it is
>> the W3C standard doesn't mean you can't criticise it. However, just
>> with SQL we are all looking at ways to help museum practitioners (does
>> this include our curators undertaking digital research projects)
>> data effectively, transparently and with reproducibility, and making
>> of the technology with something additional to the SPARQL Endpoint
>> lack of additional tools perhaps explaining lack of take up).
>> The ICOM statement,
>> "Alternative Proposal for an ICOM-CIDOC Resolution on URIs for Museum
>> Objects / Linked Open Data", is more high level statement and the
>> statement that we are currently being asked to agree. It doesn't
>> Dominic Oldman
>> Deputy Head of IS
>> IS Development Manager
>> ResearchSpace Principal Investigator
>> British Museum
>> +44 (0)20 73238796
>> +44 (0)7980 865309
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: crm-sig-bounces at ics.forth.gr
> [mailto:crm-sig-bounces at ics.forth.gr]
>> On Behalf Of Marco Neumann
>> Sent: 24 May 2012 10:04
>> To: crm-sig
>> Subject: [Crm-sig] problem of formulating queries is SPARQL it has
>> transferred the old relational paradigm onto the graph structure?
>> Hi Martin et al
>> I have just learned about this submission to Museums and the Web. The
>> authors make the following statement:
>> "Last but not least, another problem of formulating queries is SPARQL
>> (SPARQL Protocol and RDF Query Language). Most favored by information
>> technology (IT) experts, it has transferred the old relational
>> paradigm onto the graph structure of the Semantic Web, creating an
>> incredibly complex system, even for specialists. In our applications,
>> no IT expert was able to verify that a SPARQL query of the kind we
>> present in this paper will yield the results intended by a domain
>> expert simply by reading it." *
>> A New Framework for Querying Semantic Networks - Museums and the Web
>> I find this to be a misleading statement by the authors since SPARQL
>> is the recommendation by W3C to query RDF data. Would you not
>> recommend SPARQL to museum practitioners to query RDF data?
>> Marco Neumann
>> Join us at SemTech Biz in San Francisco June 3-7 2012 and save 15%
>> with the lotico community discount code 'STMN'
>> Crm-sig mailing list
>> Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr
> Marco Neumann
> Join us at SemTech Biz in San Francisco June 3-7 2012 and save 15%
> with the lotico community discount code 'STMN'
Join us at SemTech Biz in San Francisco June 3-7 2012 and save 15%
with the lotico community discount code 'STMN'
More information about the Crm-sig