- From: Nandana Mihindukulasooriya <nmihindu@fi.upm.es>
- Date: 2016年3月11日 09:04:30 +0100
- To: Wouter Beek <w.g.j.beek@vu.nl>
- Cc: Jean-Claude Moissinac <jean-claude.moissinac@telecom-paristech.fr>, Luca Matteis <lmatteis@gmail.com>, Pierre-Antoine Champin <pierre-antoine.champin@liris.cnrs.fr>, Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>, Paul Groth <p.groth@elsevier.com>
- Message-ID: <CAAOEr1=1WY6OnOpxEuW8-E9cMm1Q7LezV0jG3O+WmDACca_R=g@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Wouter, Thanks for starting this discussion. IMHO, this is a common practical issue I've faced several times. On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 8:20 AM, Wouter Beek <w.g.j.beek@vu.nl> wrote: > > - Datadumps are inferior to LDF (no triple pattern queries) but superior > to SPARQL endpoints (all data can be retrieved). They are also superior to > LDF for the singular use case of obtaining all the data. > Aren't data dumps - Inferior to both LDF and SPARQL service endpoints in querybility but superior to both LDF and SPARQL endpoints for obtaining all data with one click downloads. In LDF, a constract query with the simple pattern {?s ?p ?o}, can't I get all data with paging? However, this means that I need to have a LDF client (can I use the browser client to store this data locally? ). I also wonder whether implentors of SPARQL services did thought of providing (may be non-standard) way to handle this special case. Best Regards, Nandana
Received on Friday, 11 March 2016 08:05:00 UTC