W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > March 2019

Re: W3C Graph Data Workshop trip report

From: Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2019 10:44:58 +0000
Message-Id: <E73D0A98-999E-45D3-878D-A79789F38193@w3.org>
Cc: Hugh Glaser <hugh@glasers.org>, Juan Sequeda <juanfederico@gmail.com>, Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Indeed - this fits into the need for work on mappings and to address the different kinds of identifiers in different databases as a basis for integration across heterogeneous data sources.

> On 12 Mar 2019, at 09:28, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote:
> 
> Hugh,
> 
> I agree with Juan that these are questions for step 9:-)
> 
> However, one data point: as far as I can see and understand, the Property Graph model does not put the kind of emphasis RDF does on the usage of URI-s for the nodes and links. You can, of course, use a URI for the identification of nodes, but I would expect that the practice is to add a URL as 'label' to a node or a link.
> 
> The discussions on PG<->RDF at the workshop concentrated on ways to add such labels to RDF predicates, but you are right that the role of URL-s must be looked at as well…
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Ivan
> 
>> On 11 Mar 2019, at 23:03, Hugh Glaser <hugh@glasers.org <mailto:hugh@glasers.org>> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi Juan,
>> Many thanks.
>> I know this is the SemWeb group; although the thing that interests me is Linked Data, which is sort of related.
>> I don't want to cross-post, so I'll just ask here.
>> 
>> So was there anyone at the workshop interested in Linked Data?
>> 
>> Specifically how LD-style URIs relate to PGs and Neo4J?
>> That is, PGs relating to the core LD stuff: resolvable and globally addressable IDs.
>> I see little or no mention of IDs, URIs or anything like that, and any implications that would have for the PG technologies.
>> 
>> Is no-one interested in that?
>> I would have asked in person, but sadly I was not chosen to be invited ;-) - I'm guessing because such interests are not widely shared (I never saw the criteria for choosing invitees).
>> 
>> Or maybe everyone understands it all, and it isn't a big issue - if so, can anyone point my at a simple exposition of the issues please?
>> 
>> Best
>> Hugh
>> 
>>> On 8 Mar 2019, at 18:42, Juan Sequeda <juanfederico@gmail.com <mailto:juanfederico@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> All,
>>> 
>>> I wrote my trip report on the W3C Graph Data workshop: http://www.juansequeda.com/blog/2019/03/08/w3c-graph-data-workshop-trip-report/ <http://www.juansequeda.com/blog/2019/03/08/w3c-graph-data-workshop-trip-report/>
>>> 
>>> It was a successful event! In a nutshell
>>> – There is a unified and vibrant graph community.
>>> – A W3C Business Group will be formed and serve as a liaison between different interested parties.
>>> – There is a push for RDF*/SPARQL* to be a W3C Member submission.
>>> – There is interest to standardize a Property Graph data model with a schema.
>>> – There is interest to standardize mappings between Property Graphs and RDF.
>>> 
>>> Best,
>>> 
>>> Juan
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Juan Sequeda, Ph.D
>>> www.juansequeda.com <http://www.juansequeda.com/>
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Hugh
>> 023 8061 5652
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> ----
> Ivan Herman, W3C 
> Publishing@W3C Technical Lead
> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ <http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/>
> mobile: +31-641044153
> ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 <https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704>
> 

Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org> http://www.w3.org/People/Raggett
W3C Data Activity Lead & W3C champion for the Web of things 
Received on Tuesday, 12 March 2019 10:45:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 12 March 2019 10:45:04 UTC