Re: GraphQL-RDF implementation, schema generation and common ground

Hello,

So we don't have any vendor participation other than Ontotext.
TopQuadrant is out and no messages incoming from Stardog.

So, I think perhaps a standard driven just by Ontotext, would be.. less
valuable.
Anyway, if you disagree, let me know. Otherwise, I suspect a call would be
wasting most peoples time, just now.

Regards
Jem

Mobile: +44 (0)7957 341470


On Thu, 17 Sep 2020 at 00:09, Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
wrote:

> We at TopQuadrant do have a GraphQL mapping based on SHACL in production
> and it does seem to work well. At this stage, even if a group of other
> implementers would come up with a generalized/standardized approach, I
> don't think we would be able or willing to spend resources on changing our
> implementation as this would break all client code including enterprise
> customers. There would need to be some really significant benefits from
> such a change. Having said this, a standard could lead to 3rd party
> implementations which we could then integrate as an additional service
> interface.
>
> I guess I'll stay on the side lines for now as the problem is already
> solved for us, sorry.
>
> Holger
>
> https://www.topquadrant.com/technology/graphql/
>
>
> On 16/09/2020 21:02, Jem Rayfield wrote:
>
> OK, if you are interested in talking about GraphQL schema generation
> (standards) from RDF please register your interest in a call using the
> following doodle poll.
>
> https://doodle.com/poll/pu34n4kxadsz57ch
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 11:00 AM Ruben Taelman <ruben.taelman@ugent.be>
> wrote:
>
>> > Sounds, good. How does one usually organise, such a call?
>>
>> I would suggest setting up a Doodle to determine a timeslot that works
>> for most people.
>> But I’m open to alternatives!
>>
>> For setting up the call, we should be able to request a one-time or
>> recurring WebEx meeting via this:
>> https://www.w3.org/Guide/1998/08/TeleconferenceHowTo.htm
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Ruben Taelman
>>
>> > On 16 Sep 2020, at 11:50, Jem Rayfield <jem.rayfield@ontotext.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > "Having a call might be a good first step to initiate this effort?"
>> >
>> > Sounds, good. How does one usually organise, such a call?
>> > Sorry, I am a W3C group noob.
>> >
>> > On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 10:43 AM Ruben Taelman <ruben.taelman@ugent.be>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi Hem,
>> >
>> > > Does the group have an up to date list of GraphQL-RDF solutions,
>> libraries, services etc? If not where can we start collating this
>> information?
>> >
>> > We have a W3C GitHub repo where we are collecting things:
>> > https://github.com/w3c/graphql-rdf/blob/master/docs/resources.md
>> >
>> > Feel free to send a PR if anything is missing from that list.
>> >
>> > > It would be good to start some analysis across the various
>> GraphQL-RDF schema generation approaches to find common ground and
>> divergence.
>> >
>> > +1
>> > Having a call might be a good first step to initiate this effort?
>> >
>> >
>> > As mentioned on Twitter, I don’t have sufficient bandwidth at the
>> moment to pull this effort on my own.
>> > I’m however happy to help anyone who would have more time to pull this.
>> >
>> > Kind regards,
>> > Ruben Taelman
>> >
>> > > On 16 Sep 2020, at 11:26, Jem Rayfield <jem.rayfield@ontotext.com>
>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Hello,
>> > >
>> > > Does the group have an up to date list of GraphQL-RDF solutions,
>> libraries, services etc? If not where can we start collating this
>> information?
>> > >
>> > > Also, could we perhaps get Rubens paper updated?
>> > >
>> > > It would be good to start some analysis across the various
>> GraphQL-RDF schema generation approaches to find common ground and
>> divergence.
>> > >
>> > > Let me know how I can help, with the effort
>> > >
>> > > Cheers
>> > > --
>> > > Jem Rayfield
>> > > Chief Architect
>> > > Ontotext AD
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Jem Rayfield
>> > Chief Architect
>> > Ontotext AD
>>
>>
>
> --
> Jem Rayfield
> Chief Architect
> Ontotext AD
>
>