- From: Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org>
- Date: Fri, 03 Jan 2014 09:55:57 +0000
- To: public-propertygraphs@w3.org
Gregg looked at using RDF to encode property graphs (PG), using bnode properties for links with attributes. [1] What about other way round - mapping RDF to PG? In the PropertyGraphs data model there are vertexes, links (edges, relationalships) and attributes (named values for a vertex and edges). This is similar to XML (elements and attributes) and OWL (object properties and data type properties). 2 features of RDF make the mapping from RDF into PG easy: 1/ Literals only appear in the object position. 2/ Properties don't have qualifiers. Blank Nodes can be treated some kind of label to be distinguished from URIs. We write use the pseudo URI scheme "_:" here. Mapping RDF onto PropertyGraphs -- A/ Each subject or object URI or bNode becomes a vertex with a URI or bNode as label. B/ Each property value of subject V, if it has a literal object, it becomes an attribute of V, named by the URI of the property. C/ Each property value of subject V that is a URI or blank node, becomes an edge in the property graph, with label the URI of the property. Attributes on edges are not used. In the language of the RDF-2004 working group, literals are not tidy [2] in property graphs. In RDF-speak: :a :p 123 . :b :q 123 . and pattern { ?x :p ?v . ?y :q ?v . } works because 123 has in-edges of :p and :q. It is a tidy literal meaning there is on node in the graph for 123, not two. This does not happen in PropertyGraphs; access to attributes is different to accessing vertexes (e.g. the ".has" operation in gremlin). This mapping also suggests how to turn a property graph without attributes on edges into an RDF graph. Edges with attributes can be encoded as n-ary relationships [3]. An alternative mapping is to not use attributes at all. Each subject or object becomes a vertex, and every triple becomes and edge. But now the labelling of the vertexes needs to include datatype/URI information. This is much more an encoding of RDF onto PG, rather than a mapping. In an encoding, the information is there and can be extracted but working directly on the encoding with the PG tools can be unnatural. In a mapping, you could query and navigate the PG graph using PG tools e.g. look up all vertexes with an attribute of 123. Andy [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/2013Aug/0026.html [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-rdf-concepts-20020829/ [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-n-aryRelations/
Received on Friday, 3 January 2014 09:56:28 UTC