Re: RDF* implementations and PG/SA modes (updated list)

Stardog does (2). Re: (1), it seems orthogonal to the SA vs PG discussion.
We can see ourselves supporting that (as well as nesting) if there's
demand, we don't expect any technical challenges there.

Cheers,
Pavel

On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 7:02 PM Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org> wrote:

>
>
> On 15/08/2020 17:15, thomas lörtsch wrote:
> > Thanks for all responses, corrections and additions and an accordingly
> updated list:
> >
> >
> >    SA  PG  Implementation  Notes - Documentation
> >
> >        +   AllegroGraph    in the works -
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star/2020Aug/0021.html
> >        x   AnzoGraph
> https://docs.cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph/v2.2/userdoc/lpgs.htm?Highlight=rdf
> >        x   BlazeGraph
> https://github.com/blazegraph/database/wiki/Reification_Done_Right
> >    x       GraphDB
> http://graphdb.ontotext.com/documentation/9.2/free/devhub/rdf-sparql-star.html
> >    x       Jena
> https://jena.apache.org/documentation/rdfstar/
> >    +   +   N3              deferred -
> https://github.com/w3c/N3/issues/27#issuecomment-644768502
> >    x       rdf4j
> https://rdf4j.org/documentation/programming/rdfstar/
> >    x   +   rdfjs/N3.js     PG may become configurable soon -
> https://github.com/rdfjs/data-model-spec/pull/165
> >    x   x   RubyRDF
> http://rdf.greggkellogg.net/yard/file.rdf-README.html#rdf-rdfstar
> >        x   Stardog
> https://www.stardog.com/docs/#_edge_properties
> >
> >
> >
> > I see a tendency towards PG mode. Comments from SA implementers
> suggested that they chose this approach also because going from SA to PG is
> easier than the other way round. Also some PG implementers don’t seem to be
> particularily enthused about SA mode.
>
> Great survey!
>
> Of the PG systems, how many:
>
> (1) Implement <<>> in the object position
> (2) Provide cascading deletion
>
> in their current releases?
>
>      Andy
>
> >
> > Thomas
>
>
> >
> >
> >> On 10. Aug 2020, at 21:41, Steve Sarsfield <
> steve.sarsfield@cambridgesemantics.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Confirming that for AnzoGraph DB, this chart is correct. We support the
> property graph style. We don’t currently have any product roadmap planned
> for separate assertions.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Steve Sarsfield, AnzoGraph DB
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>