Hi all, reading the thread with interest. If I understand correctly most of these approaches Grit, RXR, etc only provide normalisation, which in my opinion is only ONE part of the story in making existing RDF data amenable to XSLT/XQuery transformations.
What it doesn't address is that probably big (and increasingly with the adoption of SPARQL) ammounts of RDF data are residing in RDF stores... you don't want to dump that whole data into RDF/XML first and then query it with XSLT/XQuery if a SPARQL interface is already available, do you? To this end we have developed a combined query- and transformation language called XSPARQL [1,2,3] which should address this drawback. Instead of a two-step approach first transforming to XML and then querying with XML-query-languages, the idea is more to query both XQuery and SPARQL in one language. (The naive implementation acctually works by transforming the query into an XQuery that makes interleaved calls to a SPARQL engine, we are at the moment working on a more integrated version and also language improvements). Anyways, this mail is less about the advertising of XSPARQL itself, but more on a principles question on the approach... is it really normalized RDF/XML that we want or don't we rather want to query RDF directly with SPARQL and XML with XQuery/XSLT? best, Axel 1. http://www.w3.org/Submission/2009/01/ 2. http://xsparql.deri.org/ 3. On 19 Jan 2010, at 21:00, Christoph LANGE wrote: > 2010-01-19 20:04 Toby Inkster <t...@g5n.co.uk>: > > You may be interested in the RXR output plugin I wrote for ARC2 a few > > months ago: > > > > http://goddamn.co.uk/viewvc/demiblog-new/arc-patching/plugins/ > > I had already feared that RXR had been abandoned, so it's good to see that > there are up-to-date implementations supporting it :-) > > Cheers, > > Christoph > > -- > Christoph Lange, Jacobs Univ. Bremen, http://kwarc.info/clange, Skype duke4701 > >
