The 4-8 week deadline is more self-imposed than anything. The plan is (or
was) to deploy the new version of this project by mid-late summer. It is
already under way, with a working prototype, and I can probably mostly
finish it in 80-120 hours of solid work. I want to deploy it as soon as we
can because other bigger, sexier projects depend on RDF delivered from this
project. If it takes six months to completely rewrite this project for
node, or any non-java platform with which I have less experience, we've
thrown a monkey wrench into the development of our other projects.
As for triplestores:
Mulgara is on my list to check out, as is sesame. Does mulgara support
SPARQL Update yet? In theory, one should be able to post updates directly
from XForms into a triplestore which supports SPARQL Update. Maybe this
warrants a separate thread.
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 3:39 PM, Kevin Ford <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > (and am
> > looking into a java triplestore to run in Tomcat)
> -- I don't know if the parenthetical was simply a statement or a
> solicitation - apologies if it was the former.
> Take a look at Mulgara. Drops right into Tomcat.
> On 05/08/2012 02:01 PM, Ethan Gruber wrote:
>> For what it's worth, I have processed XML in PHP, Ruby, and Saxon/XSLT 2,
>> but I feel like I'm missing some sort of inside joke here.
>> Thanks for the info. To clarify, I don't develop in java, but deploy
>> well-established java-based apps in Tomcat, like Solr and eXist (and am
>> looking into a java triplestore to run in Tomcat) and write scripts to
>> these web services interact in whichever language seems to be the most
>> appropriate. Node looks like it may be interesting to play around with,
>> but I'm wary of having to learn something completely new, jettisoning
>> application and language I am experienced with, to put a new project into
>> production in the next 4-8 weeks.
>> On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 1:15 PM, Nate Vack<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 11:45 AM, Ross Singer<[log in to unmask]>
>>>> On May 8, 2012, at 10:17 AM, Ethan Gruber wrote:
>>>>> in. Our data is exclusively XML, so LAMP/Rails aren't really options.
>>>> ^^ Really? Nobody's going to take the bait with this one?
>>> I can't see why they would; parsing XML in ruby is simply not possible.