I believe that there are "C" libraries for MySQL that use a low level connection, but that is neither here nor there.
What I am talking about is more along the lines of a remove Graph interface. Something that does not use SPARQL but that uses the Jena Graph model over the wire. +------------------- | SPARQL +------------------ | Fuseki +------------------ | ARQ +----------------- | Jena Model +----------------- | Jena Graph +--------------- I am talking about network connections that operate at the Model or Graph level not SPARQL. So it would be possible to take an application that uses the Jena Model and run it against a remote or central Jena server. So that you can make Model.findSubjectsWithProperty( "foo" ) calls against the server without having to convert it to SPARQL. The other advantage is that the resources that are returned by that call can then be used as resources not result set values. The interface I am thinking of operates at a different layer and has different semantics from the SPARQL layer. -- Claude On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 2:55 PM, Dominique Brezinski < dominique.brezin...@gmail.com> wrote: > What do you think Fuseki is? What protocol is used by the MySQL client to > query the server over the network? SQL. What protocol is used by the client > to query Fuseki over the network? SPARQL. > > Using your analogy, Jena is more like InnoDB, and Fuseki is more like > MySQL. What exactly do you want to build if it is not Fuseki? > > Dom > > On Mar 27, 2013, at 1:52 AM, Claude Warren <cla...@xenei.com> wrote: > > > Currently Jena seems to require the use of Fuseki (or other web front > end) > > to handle multiple applications talking to the same dataset/model/graph. > > > > Is this an intended (planned) direction or has there been any thought put > > to the idea that a Jena server at a lower level. Something akin to the > > MySQL C API which, as I understand it, allows multiple application to > > attach to a single MySQL instance. > > > > What I am thinking of here is basically a Graph implementation for the > > client that uses a network connection to proxy the requests to a server > > component. All this without the need of installing Fuseki. This would > > allow multiple applications written against the Jena API to execute > against > > a shared Jena server. > > > > Other possible implementations are a Model implementation or a Dataset > > implementation. Or perhaps all 3, depending on the performance we can > get > > from the low level calls. > > > > > > +-----+ +---------------+ +-----+ > > |App1|------|Jena Server| -------|App2| > > +-----+ +---------------+ +-----+ > > | > > +----------+ > > | Fuseki | > > +----------+ > > > > Is there any interest in this? > > > > > > > > Claude > > > > > > > > -- > > I like: Like Like - The likeliest place on the web< > http://like-like.xenei.com> > > Identity: https://www.identify.nu/user.php?cla...@xenei.com > > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/claudewarren > -- I like: Like Like - The likeliest place on the web<http://like-like.xenei.com> Identity: https://www.identify.nu/user.php?cla...@xenei.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/claudewarren
