W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-star@w3.org > August 2020

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

From: Steve Sarsfield <steve.sarsfield@cambridgesemantics.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2020 16:38:02 -0400
Message-ID: <CAL3k4tXew_5p5JkV51iLHKDq20zOXP6s61yAGM0XUAHAxrktVA@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: public-rdf-star@w3.org
Yes, AnzoGraph DB does 2.

Re 1: Against restricting the RDF* spec to SA. Not sure why you'd do that
with many vendors in support of PG.  For us, the train of thought is about
building a bridge to the Neo4J users of the world, potentially sharing
ecosystems, tools, etc.



*Steve SarsfieldAnzoGraph DB*

On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 1:22 PM Pavel Klinov <pavel@stardog.com> wrote:

> 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
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
Received on Monday, 17 August 2020 20:38:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 17 August 2020 20:38:30 UTC