Axel Polleres: Unterschied zwischen den Versionen
Qr0241 (Diskussion | Beiträge) (Die Seite wurde neu angelegt: „{{Veranstaltung |Titel DE=Axel Polleres |Titel EN=Axel Polleres |Beschreibung DE=folgt |Beschreibung EN=folgt |Veranstaltungsart=Kolloquium Angewandte Informatik …“) |
Qr0241 (Diskussion | Beiträge) |
||
| Zeile 1: | Zeile 1: | ||
{{Veranstaltung | {{Veranstaltung | ||
| − | |Titel DE= | + | |Titel DE=SPARQL1.1 Updates and Entailment - Why the specification is silent about their interaction |
| − | |Titel EN= | + | |Titel EN=SPARQL1.1 Updates and Entailment - Why the specification is silent about their interaction |
| − | |Beschreibung DE= | + | |Beschreibung DE=Updates in RDF stores have recently been standardised in the SPARQL 1.1 Update specification. However, computing answers entailed by ontologies in triple stores is usually treated orthogonal to updates. Even |
| − | |Beschreibung EN= | + | the W3C's recent SPARQL 1.1 Update language and SPARQL 1.1 Entailment Regimes specifications |
| + | explicitly exclude a standard behaviour how SPARQL endpoints should treat entailment regimes other than simple entailment in the context of updates. In this talk, we outline different routes to close this gap. | ||
| + | Restricting ourselves mostly to a relatively simple entailment regime (RDF Schema), we discuss possible semantics along with potential strategies for implementing them. We treat both, (i) materialised RDF stores, which store all entailed triples explicitly, and (ii) reduced RDF Stores, that is, redundancy-free RDF stores that do not store any assertional RDF triples (corresponding to DL-Lite ABox statements) entailed by others already. As it turns out, a one-size-fits-all semantics does not exist... We note and will discuss that the | ||
| + | problem of updates under entailment regimes is closely related to Updates in Ontology-based-Data-Access (OBDA), where - as a survey of related literature shows - also no standard solution exist either. | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |Beschreibung EN=Updates in RDF stores have recently been standardised in the SPARQL 1.1 Update specification. However, computing answers entailed by ontologies in triple stores is usually treated orthogonal to updates. Even | ||
| + | the W3C's recent SPARQL 1.1 Update language and SPARQL 1.1 Entailment Regimes specifications | ||
| + | explicitly exclude a standard behaviour how SPARQL endpoints should treat entailment regimes other than simple entailment in the context of updates. In this talk, we outline different routes to close this gap. | ||
| + | Restricting ourselves mostly to a relatively simple entailment regime (RDF Schema), we discuss possible semantics along with potential strategies for implementing them. We treat both, (i) materialised RDF stores, which store all entailed triples explicitly, and (ii) reduced RDF Stores, that is, redundancy-free RDF stores that do not store any assertional RDF triples (corresponding to DL-Lite ABox statements) entailed by others already. As it turns out, a one-size-fits-all semantics does not exist... We note and will discuss that the | ||
| + | problem of updates under entailment regimes is closely related to Updates in Ontology-based-Data-Access (OBDA), where - as a survey of related literature shows - also no standard solution exist either. | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
|Veranstaltungsart=Kolloquium Angewandte Informatik | |Veranstaltungsart=Kolloquium Angewandte Informatik | ||
|Start=2015/02/26 10:00:00 | |Start=2015/02/26 10:00:00 | ||
| Zeile 9: | Zeile 21: | ||
|Gebäude=11.40 | |Gebäude=11.40 | ||
|Raum=202 | |Raum=202 | ||
| − | |Vortragender=Rudi Studer | + | |Vortragender=Prof.Dr. Axel Polleres |
| + | |Eingeladen durch=Rudi Studer | ||
| + | |PDF=26.2.Polles.pdf | ||
|Forschungsgruppe=Wissensmanagement | |Forschungsgruppe=Wissensmanagement | ||
|In News anzeigen=True | |In News anzeigen=True | ||
}} | }} | ||
Version vom 13. Februar 2015, 09:46 Uhr
SPARQL1.1 Updates and Entailment - Why the specification is silent about their interaction
Veranstaltungsart:
Kolloquium Angewandte Informatik
Updates in RDF stores have recently been standardised in the SPARQL 1.1 Update specification. However, computing answers entailed by ontologies in triple stores is usually treated orthogonal to updates. Even
the W3C's recent SPARQL 1.1 Update language and SPARQL 1.1 Entailment Regimes specifications
explicitly exclude a standard behaviour how SPARQL endpoints should treat entailment regimes other than simple entailment in the context of updates. In this talk, we outline different routes to close this gap.
Restricting ourselves mostly to a relatively simple entailment regime (RDF Schema), we discuss possible semantics along with potential strategies for implementing them. We treat both, (i) materialised RDF stores, which store all entailed triples explicitly, and (ii) reduced RDF Stores, that is, redundancy-free RDF stores that do not store any assertional RDF triples (corresponding to DL-Lite ABox statements) entailed by others already. As it turns out, a one-size-fits-all semantics does not exist... We note and will discuss that the
problem of updates under entailment regimes is closely related to Updates in Ontology-based-Data-Access (OBDA), where - as a survey of related literature shows - also no standard solution exist either.
(Prof.Dr. Axel Polleres)
Start: 26. Februar 2015 um 10:00
Ende: 26. Februar 2015 um 11:00
Im Gebäude 11.40, Raum: 202
Veranstaltung vormerken: (iCal)
Veranstalter: Forschungsgruppe(n) Wissensmanagement
Information: Media:26.2.Polles.pdf