I realize my post was a kind of fussy, so here are a few specific
== Question 1: Current status for import in SMW ==
Is there any ongoing work to improve the import functionality in SMW?
== Question 2: Interest in developing import in SMW ==
Is there any interest or even plans to improve the import functionality
== Question 3: Interest in rewrite / update of SMWWriter ==
More specifically, is there any interest in rewiving / rewriting /
updating SMWWriter , or create something equivalent: A generic
fact-editing interface, as an extension to the MediaWiki API?
Comment 1: Note that SMWWriter (and later RDFIO) provides fact editing
via *update of wiki articles*, not by directly inserting into a triple
store. This is a big distinction, as most other SMW import tools I have
seen take the second approach. The first approach though, of importinng
*via wiki article updates*, has the benefit that it is totally
independent of what triple store is using, and is of course crucial if
one wants to have the wiki articles and the triplestore, in sync.
Comment 2: It would be nice to have one, well supported, such
functionality, which I could build upon from RDFIo, and other RDF /
SPARQL tools that needs import functionality, could use as well.
== Comments on all the questions ==
The background to these questions is that I'm thinking about the future
of import in SMW and would be happy if the core import functionality
could be maintained for a foreseable future, independent on development
of 3rd-party extensions such as RDFIO.
I'm happy to help in that direction, but to make this become a trusted
high-quality part of the Semantic Bundle for example, I'm afraid, would
require the skills of someone with more programming experience and
in-depth knowledge of SMW internals.
Thus, I'm polling whether someone is interested in taking on such a
project, alone or in collaboration?
On 2013-10-21 15:23, Samuel Lampa wrote:
> Hi all,
> What is the current status of (REST) APIs and import functionality in
> As some of you might have noticed, I have been working a bit lately on
> trying to finish the RDFIO extension to a workable state, efter many
> years. At the same time, haing gone, over the last couple of years, to
> a very green coder-wannabe, to having at least some year of working
> coding experience, I start to get some perspective of what was the
> situation before we started developing RDFIO, and what would have been
> a more optimal path:
> 1. I realize Denny's SMWWriter was already very much operating in the
> way one would want for this kind of module (exposed via the MediaWiki
> REST API).
> 2. Thus, I wish I would have rather extended that with the SPARQL
> functionality of the current RDFIO extension, and worked to drop the
> dependency on the POM module.
> Instead, by lack of overview of things, I went away to create
> specialized Special pages for everything (RDF Import, SPARQL endpoint,
> and recently SPARQL endpoint copy / replication), and basically made
> RDFIO into an add-on hack over how SMW normally works.
> It turns out I simply haven't seen the big picture clear enough to see
> how things should have been done from the start, and to appreciate
> Denny's work on this already :P
> So, when looking into the future, I would like to hear your thoughts
> on the current situation regarding external APIs, and import
> functionality, in SMW, and in which direction you would be interested
> to work?
> Personally, while RDFIO is now there and functionality starts to be
> reasonably stable*, I would love to have these things more packaged
> like how the SMWWriter extension was (mostly exposing functionality
> via MW API), and possibly integrated in the SMW core and less like how
> it is now, with RDFIO as a separate box, doing it's stuff it's own way.
> For the move towards using MW API more, that would quite probably be
> the future plans for RDFIO, if I can find an opportunity to continue
> on it.
> A move towards SMW core of similar functionality (probably by newly
> written code, and provided that is a thinkable direction for the core
> devs), would most probably take a more skilled programmer / set of
> programmers, than me alone, and I'm thus interested to hear what you
> think about all this?
> // Samuel
Developer at www.uppmax.uu.se & www.farmbio.uu.se
October Webinars: Code for Performance
Free Intel webinars can help you accelerate application performance.
Explore tips for MPI, OpenMP, advanced profiling, and more. Get the most from
the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register >
Semediawiki-devel mailing list