would deal with that….guess they just code it.
Avro was new to me…(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_Avro
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_Avro>, yet another data language)
Thx for the paper!
I see also the advantages of your ‘graphql-ld’ approach over Ghent
keeping the GraphQL Schema in the picture.
I was more wondering whether graphql (and graphql schema) could use
json-ld treatment more as first class citizen in some official
GraphQL*-LD (GraphQL Schema-LD) * instead of just as being a special
version of json… (in a sense standardizing the kind of extensions you did)
(I see this discussion in their lists without clear answers though)
Thx michel
Dr. ir. H.M. (Michel) Bohms
Scientist Specialist
Structural Reliability
T +31 (0)88 866 31 07
M +31 (0)63 038 12 20
E [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
Location <http://www.tno.nl/locations/DTS>
<http://www.tno.nl/>
This message may contain information that is not intended for you. If
you are not the addressee or if this message was sent to you by
mistake, you are requested to inform the sender and delete the
message. TNO accepts no liability for the content of this e-mail, for
the manner in which you use it and for damage of any kind resulting
from the risks inherent to the electronic transmission of messages.
*Van:* [email protected]
<[email protected]> *Namens *Irene Polikoff
*Verzonden:* donderdag 18 maart 2021 16:45
*Aan:* [email protected]
*Onderwerp:* Re: [topbraid-users] json-ld question
On Mar 18, 2021, at 10:21 AM, David Price <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On 18 Mar 2021, at 13:01, 'Bohms, H.M. (Michel)' via TopBraid
Suite Users <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Not really TBC questions but I guess you can give the best answer.
I see popularity of json-ld rising a lot (as optimal
compromise between webdev and ld/sw world) where people might
just forget about the (for them) complex RDF conceptuals above….
JSON-LD does nothing to reduce the complex concepts that might be
defined in RDFS, OWL or SHACL data models. JSON-LD is an
implementation format for RDF-based data. Without the underlying
RDF-based model there is no JSON-LD.
I interpreted Michel’s words to be about complexity of
understanding/using RDF data structures and technologies when
developing applications vs making it possible for developers to stay
in the JSON word. I did not think he was talking about data models. If
one stays solely within the JSON stack, the need for data models is
addressed by things like GraphQL Schema, JSON Schema and Avro. They
are pretty simple schema languages with minimal expressivity.
I am attaching a presentation that may be useful in understanding why
we believe the combination of SHACL with GraphQL is more powerful than
just GraphQL Schema and GraphQL.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "TopBraid Suite Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/3548DDA7-14A7-41F9-8314-1C590149FB96%40topquadrant.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/3548DDA7-14A7-41F9-8314-1C590149FB96%40topquadrant.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
GraphQL tools and infrastructure rely on having GraphQL Schema. I am
referring to tools such as GraphiQL which we integrated into EDG to
provide interactive, syntax directed query development and she
documentation capabilities expected by the GraphQL query developers.
This is why EDG autogenerates GraphQL Schema to enable GraphQL query.
Our approach is different from Ghent University:
Ghent University implementation translates GraphQL queries into
SPARQL, then runs SPARQL over RDF data. So, this is something that
could potentially sit in front of any SPARQL endpoint. I would,
however, expect the (necessary to this approach) heavy use of OPTIONAL
in the generated SPARQL to create performance problems for SPARQL
endpoints. Their use of JSON-LD is about taking advantage of JSON-LD
context to map textual ids in GraphQL e.g., “prefLabel” to the full URI.
In this approach, there is no GraphQL Schema to drive GraphQL tools or
to provide documentation to GraphQL developers as to what they could
actually query for. The GraphQL capabilities are limited to vanilla
GraphQL. GraphQL is a small and simple language for APIs with the
built-in ability to extend it and most GraphQL implementations add
such extensions. There is no way to define or provide extended GraphQL
query capabilities or to query the model itself, etc.
TopBraid EDG generates enhanced GraphQL Schemas from SHACL. The schema
then enables GraphQL query. One of the benefits of this approach is
easy/seamless integration with the GraphQL tools and ecosystem.
GraphQL directives are used to hold information necessary to create
unique identifiers, so there is no need to craft or use JSON-LD
contexts. GraphQL infrastructure would not be expected to understand
or require JSON-LD context. Directives are also use to describe the
extended query capabilities. I will not try to repeat in text other
points described in the presentation above.
Overall, Holger is probably the best person to address this question.
It makes sense for Web developers to use anything making
Javascript development easier (e.g. eliminating having to learn a
new format/syntax) . So, for that scenario JSON-LD may very well
be their preference.
However, most folks think TTL is easier to read and write in a
text editor, for example vs JSON-LD or RDF/XML. Also, if you don’t
know/prefer Javascript and JSON you may not going to prefer
JSON-LD or if your application is not browser-based then it may
actually be a Con, not a Pro.
In that sense I see more and more projects that go json-ld
(iso rdf/xml, turtle etc.) also involving storage options like
mongodb iso triple/quad stores. At the same time people like
graphql(-ld) over sparql.
Probably depends on if you come from a database vs. Web developer
background as much as anything else.
These trends gives rise for me to some issues:
1.
If RDF* evolves bringing us better metadata options (treating
statements as objects again) on LD side would that also give
rise to a JSON-LD* next to Turtle*?
Or is json-ld already by itself more flexible here so that no
change is needed? (ie is the current use of json-ld as RDF
serialization an already restricted usage?)
I am trying to find out if turtle and hence Turtle* will have
advantages over json-ld…
Until we see the final “standards” we cannot be 100% sure, but it
seems unlikely one will be better than the other wrt this
question. I imagine the criteria for choosing between them in a
specific scenario is unlikely to change. Again, we’ll have to wait
and see though as nobody knows right now.
2.
I know graphQL-LD approach as defined/demonstrated etc. by
Ghent university
(https://comunica.github.io/Article-ISWC2018-Demo-GraphQlLD/
<https://comunica.github.io/Article-ISWC2018-Demo-GraphQlLD/>).
Is your prefixes graphql schema extension doing (functionaly)
the same?
Our Web site says:
/Query schemas for use with GraphQL are automatically generated
from the data models. This includes powerful features to select,
filter, aggregate, dynamically compute and page results. For even
more power, full support for SPARQL expressions is available from
GraphQL queries. Data updates are automatically validated using
SHACL shapes./
So I’ll guess not exactly the same as what Ghent is doing.
If so isn’t there room for a_standard_graph-ql-ld variant
having those extensions in a standard way?
Or… is such a GraphQL update already in the making (much a
like json to json-ld)?
There is a working draft next release of GraphQL online but it
does not mention this topic as far as I can tell. I’m not a
GraphQL expert though.
3.
What will happen in future: shacl or graphql schema or both?
(knowing slide no. 20
from:https://www.topquadrant.com/project/graphql_json_rdf/
<https://www.topquadrant.com/project/graphql_json_rdf/>)
If you mean in EDG for the next few years, then “both”. Cannot say
for others.
4.
Why is there a graphql schema language anyway? Why not use
json-ld schema definitions for that (because it is not
powerful enough)?
(like inschema.org <http://schema.org/>if I am right)
Sorry if these questions are out of scope.
It’s just that I need some story when people ask “why do we
have shacl/sparql, graphql schema/graphql, json-ld for schemas
(and also json schema)….can’t you make up your mind?”😊
To add to what David says below, even within a single
community/technology, it is common to have multiple
solutions/approaches to addressing needs. This is not unique to
RDF/Linked Data/Semantic Web technologies. For example, with XML you
have two popular approaches to schema languages: XML Schema and
RelaxNG. With JSON you have JSON Schema, Avro and GraphQL Schema. And
so on.
That answer is simple - there is no “your mind”. Many communities
are involved in these standards and in industry and each have
their own needs/priorities. It’s a bit like asking why we have
Java and C and C++ and Python and Javascript and Scala and Ruby.
That said, your list mixes things up a bit.
SPARQL is based on RDF, and RDF alone. It has nothing to do with
OWL or SHACL or TTL vs JSON-LD, etc. RDF and SPARQL are W3C
standards, produced by a consensus of members.
RDFS, OWL and SHACL are “modelling” languages that are built over
RDF. W3C standards, produced by a consensus of members.
RDF/XML, N-Triples, TTL, JSON-LD, etc. are all exchange encodings
and each has their pros and cons for different scenarios providing
software developers with options. W3C standards, produced by a
consensus of members.
GraphQL was a language invented by Facebook, so nothing to do with
RDF as they did not use RDF for their knowledge graph. Not a
formal standard.
You’d have to ask Facebook why they did not want to use JSON-LD
for schemas (I imagine because it is from RDF-land). TopBraid EDG
supports it because, for example, it allows non-RDF-literate
software developers to query RDF data without using SPARQL.
It’s seldom you find best practices’ available of the form for any
information technology:
When X is your problem, then Y and Z are the best practice approach.
When A is your problem, then B and C are the best practice approach.
In other words, there are benefits to having options because that
lets *You* make up your mind based on what’s best for your
situation. Most enterprises depend on knowledgable
systems/software architect to help answer that kind of question.
Cheers,
David
Thx for your views
Michel
Dr. ir. H.M. (Michel) Bohms
Scientist Specialist
Structural Reliability
T +31 (0)88 866 31 07
M +31 (0)63 038 12 20
E [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
Location <http://www.tno.nl/locations/DTS>
<image001.gif> <http://www.tno.nl/>
This message may contain information that is not intended for
you. If you are not the addressee or if this message was sent
to you by mistake, you are requested to inform the sender and
delete the message. TNO accepts no liability for the content
of this e-mail, for the manner in which you use it and for
damage of any kind resulting from the risks inherent to the
electronic transmission of messages.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "TopBraid Suite Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from
it, send an email
[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
To view this discussion on the web
visithttps://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/5402dc770eb948068fe971f523d7879e%40tno.nl
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/5402dc770eb948068fe971f523d7879e%40tno.nl?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
UK +44 (0) 7788 561308
US +1 (336) 283-0808
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "TopBraid Suite Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/242E6E67-AA35-47FB-B836-438F84EE42C6%40topquadrant.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/242E6E67-AA35-47FB-B836-438F84EE42C6%40topquadrant.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "TopBraid Suite Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/3548DDA7-14A7-41F9-8314-1C590149FB96%40topquadrant.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/3548DDA7-14A7-41F9-8314-1C590149FB96%40topquadrant.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "TopBraid Suite Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/971d3d366d874dcea265391c5ab5b5be%40tno.nl
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/971d3d366d874dcea265391c5ab5b5be%40tno.nl?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
