W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-shapes@w3.org > July 2014

Re: comparing to OWL and SPIN

From: Kendall Clark <kendall@clarkparsia.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 13:54:50 -0400
Message-ID: <CAHb4HxhAdnd0CHyzYnAjq70vGhW_11qkOxAg-agFZZoFR+adtg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Cc: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>, "Dam, Jesse van" <jesse.vandam@wur.nl>, "public-rdf-shapes@w3.org" <public-rdf-shapes@w3.org>
n Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 1:49 PM, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org> wrote:

> On 07/21/2014 08:09 AM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
>> I could be that the Regular Expression derivatives algorithm, although
>>> much less expressive then OWL, is outperforming the OWL reasoners.  Only
>>> some research and testing will give an useful answer, but certainly
>>> something nice to consider and test.
>> Yes, this could be tested.  I expect that StarDog ICV will perform very
>> well, as it works by translation into SPARQL queries.
> It looks to me like ShEx could validate a graph serialization in linear
> time (with the size of the serialization), with no need for storing the
> graph.  That's appealing to me when we're talking

about validating messages that are being sent between systems.

No need to store the graph unless its size exceed available memory, right?
That does happen from time to time.

 SPARQL based solutions require storing and searching the graph, which is
> exponential (and likely slow unless properly indexed), but that's probably
> fine if you're just validating data that you need to keep in a SPARQL
> system anyway.

Actually Stardog ICV does both; either transactionally for data under
storage or in-memory for message passing and middleware contexts.

Also, the complexity of SPARQL query answering is well understood and it's
not EXP.

Received on Monday, 21 July 2014 17:55:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:02:39 UTC