Re: CG Recommendation

On 03/01/14 16:45, Kelvin Lawrence wrote:
> There are lots of existing syntaxes/serialization a. I use GraphML a
> lot. I worry we are trying to move too fast here. I was hoping for a lot
> more discussion before trying to close on "deliverables". Let's discuss
> on our next call.

I share that worry. There are many formats and with each an implicit or 
explicit data model, with many similarities but also differences. 
xsd:dateTimes?

	Andy

>
> Happy new year to all.
>
>
> Cheers, Kelvin
> DE & CTO Software Standards
> IBM Software Group
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
> On Jan 3, 2014, at 10:12 AM, "Patrick Durusau" <patrick@durusau.net> wrote:
>
>  > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>  > Hash: SHA1
>  >
>  > Ashok,
>  >
>  > Since we are talking about property graphs, should we consider an
>  > existing graph syntax?
>  >
>  > http://www.graphviz.org/doc/info/lang.html
>  >
>  > DOT has the following advantages:
>  >
>  > 1) Widely known already
>  > 2) Supported by existing tooling
>  > 3) Supports statements about edges and nodes
>  > 4) Supports identifiers on nodes and the graph (for addressing)
>  >
>  > I am sure there are others that I am overlooking.
>  >
>  > Thinking if we don't try to re-invent the wheel, we can move more
>  > quickly towards a finished deliverable.
>  >
>  > Hope everyone is early into a great new year!
>  >
>  > Patrick
>  >
>  >
>  > On 01/03/2014 10:59 AM, Ashok Malhotra wrote:
>  > > Hi Andy: One other thought.  Should we consider a variant/extension
>  > > of one of the RDF syntaxes for expressing the data model?  This may
>  > > also tie into your thought of mapping RDF to PGs. Can someone float
>  > > a proposal? All the best, Ashok
>  > >
>  > > On 1/3/2014 6:46 AM, Andy Seaborne wrote:
>  > >> On 02/01/14 22:21, Ashok Malhotra wrote:
>  > >>> I took the liberty of creating a Wiki page to discuss what the
>  > >>> CG should recommend:
>  > >>> http://www.w3.org/community/propertygraphs/wiki/Recommendation
>  > >>>
>  > >>> Please comment.  Along with boilerplate this needs a Out of
>  > >>> Scope Bullet.
>  > >>>
>  > >>> Talk to you Tuesday.
>  > >>
>  > >> 1/ Focus
>  > >>
>  > >> In order to start of work on standardised property graphs at W3C,
>  > >> I would suggest aiming to get one thing done promptly.
>  > >>
>  > >> The more that gets added to a WG's charter, the longer it is to
>  > >> first finished document for any piece.  If you want to propose a
>  > >> 2 year WG that might actually finish in 2 years then less is
>  > >> better (most WGs overrun; WGs nearly always address "optional"
>  > >> items so they are not extras really).
>  > >>
>  > >> The most important items are the data model and syntax for
>  > >> writing the data model so it can be exchanged on the web.
>  > >>
>  > >> An important point is the experience of RDF with XML - using an
>  > >> existing data structure language lead to large files and
>  > >> cumbersome expression. Acceptable in the small, not good at
>  > >> scale.  A native property graph syntax should be included (as
>  > >> well as a JSON one if wanted but note JSON has very few datatypes
>  > >> types which makes life interesting in the detail).
>  > >>
>  > >> 2/ Linking
>  > >>
>  > >> There nothing about linking data and linking to places within
>  > >> graphs. Making data relate to other data is both a web issue but
>  > >> also an issue inside an organisation of even moderate size.
>  > >>
>  > >> 3/ Follow-ons
>  > >>
>  > >> Other, focused, WG can be chartered as it becomes clear what a
>  > >> core PG-data WG will achieve, and the community reaction to the
>  > >> work. Hopefully, that reaction includes member submissions to
>  > >> feed into those WGs.  Prototyping is better done outside a formal
>  > >> WG process.
>  > >>
>  > >> So I would remove the REST API from the charter in favor of doing
>  > >> the data model sooner.  A REST API is just one method of access;
>  > >> it does not fit all the use cases.  Rexster is on top of gremlin,
>  > >> albeit an extension, and if you are mentioning query language(s),
>  > >> the access language area is now quite large and mixed with API.
>  > >> The design space isn't clear cut.
>  > >>
>  > >> 4/ Target
>  > >>
>  > >> On the web, we have exchange of property graphs by linking to
>  > >> web resources and representations and linking to points within
>  > >> graphs.
>  > >>
>  > >> Andy
>  > >>
>  > >>
>  > >>
>  > >>
>  > >
>  > >
>  >
>  > - --
>  > Patrick Durusau
>  > patrick@durusau.net
>  > Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB)
>  > Co-Chair, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS)
>  > Editor, OpenDocument Format TC, Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300
>  > Former Chair, V1 - US TAG to JTC 1/SC 34
>  > Convener, JTC 1/SC 34/WG 3 (Topic Maps)
>  > Co-Editor, ISO 13250-5 (Topic Maps)
>  >
>  > Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net
>  > Homepage: http://www.durusau.net
>  > Twitter: patrickDurusau
>  > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>  > Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
>  > Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
>  >
>  > iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJSxuFQAAoJEAudyeI2QFGoNYIP/ipgTfGGlLujxnmB6Vqd4Qnj
>  > KlV5zOunPGvy7it9bleng4oXWf4oWSMf/b8kykNM2KdHWz2yExuKl0FvuBzo6ks5
>  > e9NiUz+xIa7o+aLLkkflOnT+y9aw6QY4Zl76UDbZHbi+CBDxcMmSYSrh5uSOAoAw
>  > kEHRF1alMThBT2wotrM5LziK7wruEegGZ4ELg3kuY+ezBu5EmCt6DunHELH/ooaW
>  > Y/dQtlQdBWwFlCU6cC6GD6icc9xwPIDUI8F1FRUkMCK9CJqaV9uF5Ndq5w9uCV1X
>  > TSwsJXUwq2hWqcDYGwLibCLPpiQm6Sk1bbFA8BfIELc3wxEH3qtDo3hz29QlHZjo
>  > A6tvplhyei8LvVSzpYr+W34pLuw4rqJJrvfhT27fY27/MC4KCwsVQkHn6cDY9b6+
>  > WFHuo9XHgYatOlgtGdK8T0n7O3wC+0GBcD7hoIR9MuwpAfjgyXfsOPBZrcgg1P3V
>  > Ezhk0SlpZXLvJ5sieH6p72HuxvCqt0gvdA7Il3f2WCb3HMhfakMWkP1jEj5VkD32
>  > srOpLrVEPpfAhav90l3EWJ47JjdAqudnxGXC0xI9sC2Lrzp0uIWpgFiAl8MvV8Oq
>  > 0mdUcOaTLll+EjSW7OTHcsbDHHY4v4rus4WaM+nzR3enL3gsSHcARU8JQhwS+EDS
>  > HVfnZcrHdnI6UYECRIdk
>  > =pAUH
>  > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>  >
>

Received on Friday, 3 January 2014 21:37:19 UTC