WingNews logo WingNews
top | item 21008502

(no title)

moxious | 6 years ago

> Can you name a property graph use case that cannot be solved with RDFS and SPARQL?

No - that's not the point. Of course you can do it with RDFS + SPARQL. For that matter you could do it with redis. Fully beside the point.

What's important is what the more fluent and easy way to do things is. People vote with their feet, and property graphs are demonstrably easier to work with for most use cases.

discuss

order

namedgraph|6 years ago

“Easier” is completely subjective, no way you can demonstrate that.

RDF solves a much larger problem than just graph data model and query. It addresses data interchange on the web scale, using URIs, zero-cost merge, Linked Data etc.

moxious|6 years ago

> “Easier” is completely subjective, no way you can demonstrate that.

I agree it's subjective. While there's no exact measurement for this sort of thing, the proxy measure people usually use is adoption; and if you look into for example Cypher vs. SPARQL adoption, Neo4j vs. RDF store adoption, people are basically voting with their feet.

From my personal experiences developing software with both, I've found property graphs much simpler and a better map for how people think of data.

It's true that RDF tries to solve data interchange on the web scale. That's what it was designed for. But the original design vision, in my view, hasn't come to fruition. There are bits and pieces that have been adopted to great effect (things like RDF microformats for tagging HTML docs) but nothing like what the vision was.

westurner|6 years ago

> property graphs are demonstrably easier to work with for most use cases.

How do you see property graphs as distinct from RDF?

People build terrible apps without schema or validation and leave others to clean that up.