I've got nothing against DBPedia, although I don't think it's particularly useful to make a comparison in that way between Virtuoso and Jena, unless you are ready to do the work to ensure that the actual resourcing for the two services is the same, forever.
Where would you be serving this data from? Do you have perhaps employer backing or other long-term backing for this? --- A. Soroka The University of Virginia Library > On Apr 4, 2017, at 9:34 AM, baran...@gmail.com wrote: > > >> This sounds like an interesting idea. Do you have some time to devote to it? >> What database are you thinking of serving? > > Well, we can take the same as Virtuoso, Dbpedia-dataset, THE BEST would be > EXACTLY the same as Virtuoso to make comparisons, but this is an old 'idea' > of mine, here in this listing about 5-6 years old, i think... > > thanks, baran > >> >> --- >> A. Soroka >> The University of Virginia Library >> >>> On Apr 4, 2017, at 4:48 AM, baran...@gmail.com wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, 03 Apr 2017 14:54:53 +0200, javed khan <javedbtk...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi >>>> >>>> Why we need fuseki server in semantic web applications. We can run SPARQL >>>> queries without it, like we do using Jena syntax. >>> >>> If Fuseki would have had (like Virtuoso) a reference public endpoint with a >>> well known database, then were no need for such a question... >>> >>> baran >>> >>> -- >>> Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ >> > > > -- > Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
