- From: Alan Wu <alan.wu@oracle.com>
- Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2014 10:56:02 -0800
- To: public-propertygraphs@w3.org
- Message-ID: <52CAFC42.9060500@oracle.com>
Hi Kelvin, I am totally with you on that we should not reinvent. If there is a flat file like (CSV will do) serialization that we can reuse or start from, then it is great. I personally have used quite a bit GraphML, GML, and GraphSON. They are all useful. However, none of them is as simple/efficient as N-TRIPLE like format. Cheers, Zhe On 1/6/2014 9:37 AM, Kelvin Lawrence wrote: > As I mentioned before a few days ago, there are already plenty of > serializations in existence. We should not be looking to create > another one. > > I use GraphML (an XML markup) all the time. Their is also a JSON > equivalent (GraphSON) and several CSV flavours of graph serializations > as well as many other formats like GML, GEFX and GDF. > > I believe we should focus on gaps and not areas where de-facto or > better standards already exist. > > Most existing graph technology can consume several of the existing > formats. > > Cheers > Kelvin > > Kelvin R. Lawrence > Distinguished Engineer & CTO, Software Standards > IBM Software Group. 11400 > > > -----Alan Wu <alan.wu@oracle.com> wrote: ----- > To: public-propertygraphs@w3.org > From: Alan Wu <alan.wu@oracle.com> > Date: 01/06/2014 11:08AM > Subject: Re: CG Recommendation > > Hi Folks, > > Happy New Year! > > I think XML based serialization is a good idea. A problem, though, is > when data size > gets really big, the parsing and serialization can take quite a bit of > time. We may > also want to think about a flat file structure. Something along the > line of N-TRIPLES for RDF. > > Cheers, > > Zhe > > On 1/3/2014 8:45 AM, 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. >> >> 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 Monday, 6 January 2014 18:56:34 UTC