Talk:Tripresso

From semanticweb.org

Contents 1 Status 2 Who 3 Architecture 4 Things to decide 4.1 issue: Use Java 5 annotations 4.2 issue: naming schema for properties 4.3 issue: Use RDF2Go to abstract from triple store vendor 4.4 issue: should be simpler than ELMO 4.5 issues: use Dynamic proxies? 4.6 issue: use byte code creation 5 Unclear

[edit] Status

Currently discussing at RdfAnnotations

[edit] Who

Who is willing to invest some time to make a new, better RDF-OO-tool, based on experience gained from RDFReactor, Elmo and RDF2Java.

[edit] Architecture

We will surely have

• runtime
• generator
• command line interface
• maybe ANT goal
• maybe Maven2 mojo

[edit] Things to decide

Max: I suggest to use IBAW here.

[edit] issue: Use Java 5 annotations

• max: undecided
• idea: RdfAnnotations

[edit] issue: naming schema for properties

• idea: addX(o), addAllX(o[]), removeX(o), removeAllX(o[]), setX(o)
• idea: one getter/setter: In this case the getX() would always return a java.util.Set.
• pro: One can always create wrapper methods if needed.

[edit] issue: Use RDF2Go to abstract from triple store vendor

• pro: makes Tripresso more useful
• pro: Leo: I think that people should use rdf2go in as many projects as possible, and not jena or sesame directly. Especially in reusable frameworks (for example, in a generic toolkit such as gnogno)
• pro: Leo: I would think that something tripresso-like on top of rdf2go is needed
• con: James: native api support is also just as important. The rdf2go implementations that I have seen wrap the native api, causing an extra step for every Resource/Literal that is read from the repository. During early Sesame 2.0-alpha development we had tried a similar approach, having the repository api wrap the sail api, but reverted after some performance measurements where done.

James: For Elmo to support RDF2Go only the 50 or so classes in elmo-sesame need to be ported (half of which just convert between xsd literals and java.lang). Although I personally don't have the time to lead such an effort, I am available to provide technical support.

[edit] issue: should be simpler than ELMO

• pro: Leo: so I would favor a port of elmo on rdf2go, but making it simpler.
  • @@ at leo: what is too complicated about ELMO?

[edit] issues: use Dynamic proxies?

• contra:because debugging becomes much harder (max)
• pro: Leo: it is far more powerful, clean
• pro: Leo: it creates less code
• con: What I hate about ELMO is that its a little complicated and it dynamically generates code, which is compiled during runtime (at least how i understood it)
• con: Leo: I also think that the code-injection is a black art, but alas, I have no clue how to do it right.

[edit] issue: use byte code creation

• pro: James: It was decided to use byte-code creation in Elmo instead of Java Proxy in Elmo, because byte-code creation executes faster.

[edit] Unclear

• Leo: the key is auto-generated java.Proxy objects that auto-implement auto-generated interfaces using invocationhandlers, or?
  • Max: even Java dynamic proxies NEED interfaces which need to be compiled