News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on SPARQL Protocol for RDF. Parent comment

Re:SPARQL Protocol for RDF by linkmotif on Tuesday June 20, 2017 @09:43PM (#14600015)
GraphQL, though, is a bit of a lie nomenclature-wise. As I've experienced it, it's got nothing much to do with graphs, at least not in the sense that SPARQL deals with triples that form a graph. In this department I am really interested in TinkerPop [0].

I would love, some day, to spend some more time with triple stores, RDF and semantic technologies.

[0] http://tinkerpop.apache.org/docs/current/reference/

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:SPARQL Protocol for RDF by handojin on Tuesday June 20, 2017 @10:17PM (#14600179)
You might really enjoy datomic (www.datomic.com). Everything is stored as entity attribute value time and you query with a dialect of datalog. You can check out www.learndatalogtoday.org to get a flavor.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:SPARQL Protocol for RDF by tannhaeuser on Wednesday June 21, 2017 @02:02AM (#14601119)
Datomic, though, isn't Datalog syntax at all.

I've got nothing against Datomic, but can't help to think learndatalogtoday is outright false advertising by trying to capture "Datalog" as SEO term for a proprietary graph database which has nothing to do with Datalog/Prolog.

The point of Datalog is that it's a subset of Prolog syntax, implying that engines can be reasonably exchanged for one another. But this is only possible with real Datalog, or SPARQL for that matter.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:SPARQL Protocol for RDF by linkmotif on Wednesday June 21, 2017 @12:01AM (#14600556)
Prolog and datalog ae really high on my list. Thanks for the reminder!

Datomic, though... wish there was an OSS version or CE or something.

[ Parent | on HN ]