- From: Christian Chiarcos <christian.chiarcos@web.de>
- Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2018 17:28:54 +0100
- To: henry.story@bblfish.net
- Cc: Michael Brunnbauer <brunni@netestate.de>, ajs6f@apache.org, SW-forum <semantic-web@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAC1YGdij4_yYNRLXRxaR+YBxAnASCSc9-OLbE7iv6GtM4t3MBQ@mail.gmail.com>
Am Fr., 23. Nov. 2018 um 17:48 Uhr schrieb Henry Story < henry.story@bblfish.net>: > I don't know. I see lots of articles that show that graph databases are > growing such as this one > https://hub.packtpub.com/2018-year-of-graph-databases/ > > Here is a picture from that article. > > [image: Databases comparisons on DBEngine] > The same article puts some emphasis on Cypher, etc. Maybe, we should look deeper into a comparison with that, then? Personally, I don't find Cypher more readable, more intuitive, or better documented than SPARQL, nor its advantages over SPARQL much convincing. Some thoughts on both technologies are given under https://neo4j.com/blog/rdf-triple-store-vs-labeled-property-graph-difference/. Most differences are merely notational, but some observations are worth considering. This includes ids for properties (well, we can do this with reification, of course), the inability to qualify instances of relations (reification, again), arrays, etc. In the end, "We also know that publishing RDF out of Neo4j is trivial, which is the same with importing RDF." (Some students of mine actually tried to work with the RDF interfaces of Neo4j a few years ago and found them to be dissatisfying -- but in principle, that statement holds. I didn't touch Neo4j since then, though.) Best, Christian -- Prof. Dr. Christian Chiarcos Applied Computational Linguistics Johann Wolfgang Goethe Universität Frankfurt a. M. 60054 Frankfurt am Main, Germany office: Robert-Mayer-Str. 10, #401b mail: chiarcos@informatik.uni-frankfurt.de web: http://acoli.cs.uni-frankfurt.de tel: +49-(0)69-798-22463 fax: +49-(0)69-798-28931
Received on Saturday, 24 November 2018 16:29:27 UTC