From: gabriele renzi <rff_rff@...>
Date: 2005-02-01T07:45:45+09:00
Subject: Re: What's the status of Rena?

Lyle Johnson ha scritto:
> On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 06:10:45 +0900, gabriele renzi
> <rff_rff@remove-yahoo.it> wrote:
> 
> 
>>someone could sum up the differences beetween rubyrdf, the samizdat
>>rdf/sqish implementation and Rena?
>>Isn't there a significant overlap beetween all this stuff?
> 
> 
> I did some research into Rena, Ruby/RDF and some of the other
> RDF-related projects last summer.
> 
> I didn't get very far with evaluating Samizdat due to the large number
> of dependencies; but I think it's accurate to say that it's more of an
> application that uses RDF, than a library (or "framework", if you
> prefer) for processing RDF.

I knew, but I thought it somewhat embedded a module for handling RDF 
that coulf be factored out

> Dan Brickley has confirmed that Ruby/RDF is effectively a dead
> project, which leaves Rena, Semitar and Redland. As Aredridel hinted,
> Redland is certainly the most mature of the three, but it's heavily
> dependent on C extension code. Semitar was (is?) sort-of a hybrid of
> "mostly Ruby" and some C extension code. Rena was (is?) completely
> implemented in Ruby. All of them provide, to some degree,
> functionality for parsing RDF into a model and then querying that
> data.

thanks a lot for clarifying.