You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@metamodel.apache.org by Sebastian Samaruga <co...@gmail.com> on 2014/05/08 20:30:12 UTC
Re: Semantic web backend
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 <
i.am.kasper.sorensen@gmail.com> 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 <co...@gmail.com>:
>
> > 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.
> >
>
Re: Semantic web backend
Posted by Kasper Sørensen <i....@gmail.com>.
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 <co...@gmail.com>:
> 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 <cognescent@gmail.com
> >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 <
> > i.am.kasper.sorensen@gmail.com> 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 <co...@gmail.com>:
> >>
> >> > 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.
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
>
Re: Semantic web backend
Posted by Sebastian Samaruga <co...@gmail.com>.
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 <co...@gmail.com>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 <
> i.am.kasper.sorensen@gmail.com> 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 <co...@gmail.com>:
>>
>> > 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.
>> >
>>
>
>