Translating SQL Applications to the Semantic Web

  • Syed Hamid Tirmizi
  • Juan Sequeda
  • Daniel Miranker
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5181)

Abstract

The content of most Web pages is dynamically derived from an underlying relational database. Thus, the success of the Semantic Web hinges on enabling access to relational databases and their content by semantic methods. We define a system for automatic transformation of SQL DDL schemas into OWL DL ontologies. This system goes further than earlier efforts in that the entire system is expressed in first-order logic. We leverage the formal approach to show the system is complete with respect to a space of the possible relations that can be formed among relational tables as a consequence of primary and foreign key combinations. The full set of transformation rules is stratified, thus the system can be executed directly by a Datalog interpreter.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [AnB05]
    An, Y., Borgida, A., Mylopoulos, J.: Inferring Complex Semantic Mappings between Relational Tables and Ontologies from Simple Correspondences. In: Proceedings of On The Move to Meaningful Internet Systems (2005)Google Scholar
  2. [Ast07]
    Astrova, I., Korda, N., Kalja, A.: Rule-Based Transformation of SQL Relational Databases to OWL Ontologies. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Metadata & Semantics Research (October 2007)Google Scholar
  3. [Bar04]
    Barrasa, J., Corcho, O.: R2O, an Extensible and Semantically Based Database-to-Ontology Mapping Language. In: Bussler, C.J., Tannen, V., Fundulaki, I. (eds.) SWDB 2004. LNCS, vol. 3372, Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  4. [BaM07]
    Barbançon, F., Miranker, D.P.: SPHINX: Schema integration by example. Journal of Intelligent Information Systems (in press, available on-line SpringerLink)Google Scholar
  5. [Biz03]
    Bizer, C.: D2R MAP - A Database to RDF Mapping Language. In: Proceedings of the Twelfth International World Wide Web Conference (WWW) (2003)Google Scholar
  6. [Che06]
    Chen, H., Wang, Y., Wang, H., Mao, Y., Tang, J., Zhou, C., et al.: Towards a Semantic Web of Relational Databases: a Practical Semantic Toolkit and an In-Use Case from Traditional Chinese Medicine. In: Proc. of the 5th International Semantic Web Conference (2006)Google Scholar
  7. [DuW99]
    Du, H., Wery, L.: Micro: A normalization tool for relational database engineers. Journal of Network and Computer Applications 22(4), 215–232 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [HeP07]
    He, B., Patel, M., Zhang, Z., Chang, K.C.: Accessing the deep web. Communications of the ACM 50(5), 94–101 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [Hor03]
    Horrocks, I., Patel-Schneider, P.F.: Reducing OWL entailment to description logic satisfiability. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Semantic Web Conference (2003)Google Scholar
  10. [Lab05]
    de Laborda, C.P., Conrad, S.: Relational. OWL: a data and schema representation format based on OWL. In: Proceedings of the 2nd Asia-Pacific Conference on Conceptual Modeling, vol. 43, pp. 89–96 (2005)Google Scholar
  11. [Lab06]
    de Laborda, C.P., Conrad, S.: Database to Semantic Web Mapping using RDF Query Languages. In: 25th International Conference on Conceptual Modeling (November 2006)Google Scholar
  12. [LiD05]
    Li, M., Du, X., Wang, S.: Learning ontology from relational database. In: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Machine Learning and Cybernetics (2005)Google Scholar
  13. [Mil00]
    Miller, R., Haas, L.L., Hernández, M.: Schema mapping as query discovery. In: Proceedings of the VLDB Conference (2000)Google Scholar
  14. [Mot07]
    Motik, B., Horrocks, I., Sattler, U.: Bridging the gap between OWL and relational databases. In: Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on World Wide Web (2007)Google Scholar
  15. [Noy06]
    Noy, N., Rector, A. (eds.): Defining N-ary Relations on the Semantic Web. W3C Working Group Note (11/14/2007), http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/NOTE-swbp-n-aryRelations-20060412/
  16. [OWLGde]
    Smith, M.K., Welty, C., McGuinness, D.L. (eds.): OWL Web Ontology Language Guide. W3C Recommendation /REC-owl-guide-20040210/> (11/15/2007) (2004), http://www.w3.org/TR/
  17. [OWLRef]
    Dean, M., Schreiber, G. (eds.): OWL Web Ontology Language Reference. W3C Recommendation (11/14/2007), http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-ref-20040210/
  18. [RDFSem]
    Hayes, P. (ed.): RDF Semantics. W3C Recommendation (11/26/2007), http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-mt-20040210/
  19. [Rod06]
    Rodriguez, J.B., Gomez-Perez, A.: Upgrading relational legacy data to the semantic web. In: Proceedings of the 15th international Conference on World Wide Web (2006)Google Scholar
  20. [Seq07]
    Sequeda, J.F., Tirmizi, S.H., Miranker, D.P.: SQL Databases are a Moving Target. In: Position Paper for W3C Workshop on RDF Access to Relational Databases (October 2007)Google Scholar
  21. [Sto02]
    Stojanovic, L., Stojanovic, N., Volz, R.: Migrating data-intensive web sites into the semantic web. In: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Applied Computing (2002)Google Scholar
  22. [Wan00]
    Wang, S., Shen, J., Hong, T.: Mining fuzzy functional dependencies from quantitative data. In: IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics (October 2000)Google Scholar
  23. [XMLSch]
    Biron, P.V., Permanente, K., Malhotra, A. (eds.): XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes Second Edition. W3C Recommendation (11/26/2007), http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xmlschema-2-20041028/

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Syed Hamid Tirmizi
    • 1
  • Juan Sequeda
    • 1
  • Daniel Miranker
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer SciencesThe University of Texas at AustinUSA

Personalised recommendations