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.

Cheers,
Kendall
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