- From: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
- Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2015 17:00:48 +1000
- To: RDF Data Shapes Working Group <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
In order to make some progress on the question "what inferencing can or must be used", I started a wiki page with links to the reasoning support of various popular RDF/SPARQL databases https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/Entailment_Support Maybe some more knowledgeable people can provide additional details where needed, and add databases that I forgot. While many (but not all) database seem to support RDFS, I tried to understand the set up procedures for graph-level inferencing, which are sometimes quite involving (e.g. how to tell the system which class definitions to use for an instances graph). A problem that I see is that once inferencing is activated per graph, it seems to be impossible to distinguish asserted from inferred triples. This means that in a typical scenario for constraint checking, if someone edits an instance on a form, the form may also display inferred triples that in fact cannot be edited. So I have no idea how we could realistically rely on database-level inferencing at this stage. I would also like to hear from others, how many people have actually activated any of those inferencing modes in their deployed systems, and what the performance impact is. For example, Dimitris, is the dbpedia set up using inferencing? Thanks, Holger
Received on Monday, 13 April 2015 07:02:17 UTC