skip to main content
10.1145/1989284.1989312acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmodConference Proceedingsconference-collections
tutorial

Querying semantic web data with SPARQL

Published:13 June 2011Publication History

ABSTRACT

The Semantic Web is the initiative of the W3C to make information on the Web readable not only by humans but also by machines. RDF is the data model for Semantic Web data, and SPARQL is the standard query language for this data model. In the last ten years, we have witnessed a constant growth in the amount of RDF data available on the Web, which have motivated the theoretical study of some fundamental aspects of SPARQL and the development of efficient mechanisms for implementing this query language.

Some of the distinctive features of RDF have made the study and implementation of SPARQL challenging. First, as opposed to usual database applications, the semantics of RDF is open world, making RDF databases inherently incomplete. Thus, one usually obtains partial answers when querying RDF with SPARQL, and the possibility of adding optional information if present is a crucial feature of SPARQL. Second, RDF databases have a graph structure and are interlinked, thus making graph navigational capabilities a necessary component of SPARQL. Last, but not least, SPARQL has to work at Web scale!

RDF and SPARQL have attracted interest from the database community. However, we think that this community has much more to say about these technologies, and, in particular, about the fundamental database problems that need to be solved in order to provide solid foundations for the development of these technologies. In this paper, we survey some of the main results about the theory of RDF and SPARQL putting emphasis on some research opportunities for the database community.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

wednesday15-horizon-podstutorial2.wmv

References

  1. S. Abiteboul and V. Vianu. Queries and computation on the Web. Theor. Comput. Sci., 239(2):231--255, 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. F. Alkhateeb, J.-F. Baget, and J. Euzenat. Extending SPARQL with regular expression patterns (for querying RDF). J. Web Sem., 7(2):57--73, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. R. Angles and C. Gutierrez. The expressive power of SPARQL. In ISWC, pages 114--129, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. R. Angles and C. Gutiérrez. Survey of graph database models. ACM Comput. Surv., 40(1), 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. P. Barceló, C. A. Hurtado, L. Libkin, and P. T. Wood. Expressive languages for path queries over graph-structured data. In PODS, pages 3--14, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. T. Berners-Lee. Design issues: Linked Data. http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html, July 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. T. Berners-Lee, R. Fielding, and L. Masinter. Uniform resource identifier (URI): Generic syntax. http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. C. Bizer, T. Heath, and T. Berners-Lee. Linked data - the story so far. Int. J. Semantic Web Inf. Syst., 5(3):1--22, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. C. Buil-Aranda, M. Arenas, and O. Corcho. Semantics and optimization of the SPARQL 1.1 federation extension. In ESWC, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. D. Calvanese, G. De Giacomo, M. Lenzerini, and M. Y. Vardi. Containment of conjunctive regular path queries with inverse. In KR, 2000.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. J. Clark and S. DeRose. XML path language (XPath). W3C recommendation. http://www.w3.org/TR/xpath, November 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. R.V. Guha D. Brickley. RDF vocabulary description language 1.0: RDF schema, W3C recommendation, February 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. DBpedia. http://dbpedia.org/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. A. Deutsch and V. Tannen. Optimization properties for classes of conjunctive regular path queries. In DBPL, pages 21--39, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. T. Furche, B. Linse, F. Bry, D. Plexousakis, and G. Gottlob. RDF querying: Language constructs and evaluation methods compared. In Reasoning Web, pages 1--52, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. M. R. Garey and David S. Johnson. Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness. W. H. Freeman, 1979. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. B. Glimm and M. Krötzsch. SPARQL beyond subgraph matching. In ISWC, pages 241--256, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. C. Gutierrez, C. A. Hurtado, A. O. Mendelzon, and J. Pérez. Foundations of semantic web databases. J. Comput. Syst. Sci., 77(3):520--541, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. S. Harris and A. Seaborne. SPARQL 1.1 query language. W3C working draft. http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-query/, October 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. O. Hartig and A. Langegger. A database perspective on consuming Linked Data on the Web. Datenbank-Spektrum, 10(2):57--66, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. O. Hartig, J. Sequeda, J. Taylor, and P. Sinclair. How to consume Linked Data on the Web: tutorial description. In WWW, pages 1347--1348, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Pat Hayes. RDF semantics, W3C Recommendation, February 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. T. Heath and C. Bizer. Linked Data: Evolving the Web into a Global Data Space. Morgan & Claypool Publishers, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. D2R DBLP Bibliography Database hosted at L3S Research Center. http://dblp.l3s.de/d2r/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. I. Kollia, B. Glimm, and I. Horrocks. SPARQL query answering over OWL ontologies. In ESWC, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. F. Manola and E. Miller. RDF primer, W3C recommendation, February 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. A. O. Mendelzon and T. Milo. Formal models of Web queries. Inf. Syst., 23(8):615--637, 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. A. O. Mendelzon and P. T. Wood. Finding regular simple paths in graph databases. In VLDB, pages 185--193, 1989. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. S. Munoz, J. Pérez, and C. Gutiérrez. Minimal deductive systems for RDF. In ESWC, pages 53--67, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. M. T. Özsu and P. Valduriez. Principles of Distributed Database Systems, Third Edition. Prentice-Hall, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. P. F. Patel-Schneider, P. Hayes, and I. Horrocks. OWL semantics and abstract syntax. W3C recommendation. http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/, February 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. J. Pérez, M. Arenas, and C. Gutierrez. Semantics and complexity of SPARQL. In ISWC, pages 30--43, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. J. Pérez, M. Arenas, and C. Gutierrez. Semantics and complexity of SPARQL. ACM Trans. Database Syst., 34(3), 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. J. Pérez, M. Arenas, and C. Gutierrez. nSPARQL: A navigational language for RDF. J. Web Sem., 8(4):255--270, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. A. Polleres. SPARQL1.1: New features and friends (OWL2, RIF). In Rules and Reasoning, pages 23--26, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Axel Polleres. From SPARQL to rules (and back). In Proceedings of the International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW), pages 787--796, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. E. Prud-hommeaux and A. Seaborne. SPARQL query language for RDF. W3C recommendation. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/, January 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. M. Schmidt, M. Meier, and G. Lausen. Foundations of SPARQL query optimization. In ICDT, pages 4--33, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. E. Sirin and B. Parsia. SPARQL-DL: SPARQL query for OWL-DL. In OWLED, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. M. Y. Vardi. The complexity of relational query languages (extended abstract). In STOC, pages 137--146, 1982. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. V. Vianu. A Web odyssey: from Codd to XML. SIGMOD Record, 32(2):68--77, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Querying semantic web data with SPARQL

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      PODS '11: Proceedings of the thirtieth ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT-SIGART symposium on Principles of database systems
      June 2011
      332 pages
      ISBN:9781450306607
      DOI:10.1145/1989284

      Copyright © 2011 ACM

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 13 June 2011

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • tutorial

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate476of1,835submissions,26%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader
    About Cookies On This Site

    We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

    Learn more

    Got it!