RDF lists and SPARQL

Not great, but not terrible, and a bit better with SPARQL 1.1

That fact that RDF expresses everything using the same simple three-part data structure has usually been a great strength, but in the case of ordered lists (or RDF collections) it’s pretty messy. The specification defines a LISP-like way of using triples to identify, for each position in a list, what the first member is and what list has the rest of them after that. When saying “and here are the rest” for every member of the list, you don’t want to have to come up with a…

Easier querying of strings with RDF 1.1

In which a spoonful of syntactic sugar makes the string querying go down a bit easier.

The recent publication of RDF 1.1 specifications fifteen years and three days after RDF 1.0 became a Recommendation has not added many new features to RDF, although it has made a few new syntaxes official, and there were no new documents about the SPARQL query language. The new Recommendations did clean up a few odds and ends, and one bit of cleanup officially removes an annoying impediment to straightforward querying of strings.

Storing and querying RDF in Neo4j

Hands-on experience with another NoSQL database manager.

In the typical classification of NoSQL databases, the “graph” category is one that was not covered in the “NoSQL Databases for RDF: An Empirical Evaluation” paper that I described in my last blog entry. (Several were “column-oriented” databases, which I always thought sounded like triple stores—the “table” part of they way people describe these always sounded to me like a stretched metaphor designed to appeal to relational database developers.) A…