Hi Michel,
On 09/09/14 11:45, Bohms, H.M. (Michel) wrote:
Thx for your info. So LDP is really meta-level only (hence the explicit
container stuff) complementing Sparql.
LDP comes to provide another interaction model, not at a triple/quad
level as SPARQL does, but at the resource one. So you can say LDP
complements SPARQL, yes.
Guess I wrongly thought the functionality would be more like pubby
(http://wifo5-03.informatik.uni-mannheim.de/pubby/) making rdf resources directly
accessible by HTTP in the browser. In Pubby the functionality is more like "on top
of Sparql".
Pubby just offers read-only raw Linked Data over SPARQL endpoint.
Marmotta (from the LMF times) already offered raw Linked Data support,
including Read-Write Linked Data based on the Linked Media Principles:
http://code.google.com/p/lmf/wiki/PrinciplesLinkedMedia
LDP is just a natural evolution and standardization of those principles.
Do you know of any w3c work in this direction? (http access to dereferenced
resource content)?
That's basically Linked Data as TimBL defined it:
http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html
As I said in my previous email, LDP basically provides clarifications
and extensions of the rules of Linked Data.
Would this be actually be more like the LDPath functionality offered?
LDPath would be closer to SPARQL than to LDP> LDPath is a
resource-centered part language for Linked Data. Further details at:
http://marmotta.apache.org/ldpath
Hope that helps to understand the different natures and goals of each
technology in this stack.
Cheers,
--
Sergio Fernández
Partner Technology Manager
Redlink GmbH
m: +43 660 2747 925
e: sergio.fernan...@redlink.co
w: http://redlink.co
