Re: SPARQL lite?

[Steve Vestal]

Re use cases, the OSLC folks say they want to enable light-weight addition of OSLC support to existing servers of specialized data (they mention that nothing prevents SPARQL if vendors want to). It would be my own speculation, just a guess, that the US National Center for Biotechnology Information does not want to host full SPARQL query services for huge numbers of people.

On 5/18/2021 1:36 PM, Andy Seaborne wrote:

The BGP comment is informative, thanks.  That would explain why these other solutions are also fairly simple single-triple-pattern sorts of things that can be encoded in the query part of a URL.

On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 3:59 PM Steve Vestal
<steve.ves...@adventiumlabs.com> wrote:

PubChemRDF, OSLC, and probably others define their own light-weight

"SPARQL lite" or BGP query protocol, closer to the Jena Graph or
StageGenerator interfaces than full SPARQL?

query protocol, conceptually similar to the Jena Graph interface.  I was curious if there exists, or there are moves afoot to propose, a standard

On 18/05/2021 15:06, Martynas Jusevičius wrote:

Triple Pattern Fragments?
https://linkeddatafragments.org/specification/triple-pattern-fragments/

Hi Steve,

What's the use cases behind those those light-weight query protocols?




{ ?s ?p ?o . FILTER (?o > 10 && ?o < 500) }

not FILTER(?x/2 - FLOOR(?x/2) != 0) ## Test ?x is odd

and if a range, it's easy to make the query string parameters.


BGPs can be server-side expensive.

    Andy

There's a big difference between Graph.find and BGP here - Graph.find (and TPF) are low impact on the storage/. That said, I think the bulding block is "triple pattern + filter". The filter could test slots of the triple pattern maybe in a limited fashion e.g. range

OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature