back to article Graph databases speaking the same language after ISO gives GQL the nod

GQL, the query language for graph databases, has been recognized by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), offering users more portability of queries and skills between graph database systems. The first database query language to be certified by ISO since SQL in 1987, the new standard was developed by a …

  1. Korev Silver badge
    Coat

    Maybe this will finally let graph databases SPARQL

    1. AtesComp

      ...meanwhile, real work gets done using the W3C standard.

      SPARQL has been a standard for ages...WTF GQL, where have you been except in a narrow, vendor specific use case. I seriously don't understand the fascination over Neo4J as it is such a vendor lock in. Yes, they can use OWL2 but not to its full potential. Yes, they can NOW do inferencing...finally.

      The way forward is ONTOLOGY, not a so called common GQL. Seriously, this is just playing catch up to the 20+ year RDF/OWL2/SPARQL standard and it doesn't even cover federated queries, AFAICT. Examine the linked open data graph...the vast majority are on the W3C standard.

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    "Webber argued that the emergence of the standard would give CIOs a sense of confidence in investing in the graph database model as they could more easily migrate their applications and queries from one vendor to another"

    Microsoft and Oracle: no.

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Ah yes, nothing promotes widespread adoption like a standard costing nearly £200.

    So wonderful to have the International Secrets Organisation lock this behind a paywall so that none of those pesky open source projects can give their developers access.

    At least this one doesn't seem to have a list of normative references as long as your arm that you also have to buy to ensure compliance (it only has one page listed for this). That's something I guess.

  4. Andrejj_T

    standard graph query language?

    First: I subscribe to what the other comments have expressed; there already *IS* such a thing - in W3C's SPARQL, a mature standardized graph query language, integrated with other building block in the Semantic Web/Linked Open Data stack (or RDF for short). Actually there are even case-specific extensions to SPARQL, like Continous-SPARQL (or C-SPARQL) and GeoSPARQL.

    Secondly: As if SPARQL wasn't enough, the knowledge graph world consists of three camps, and only one "needs" standardization. These camps are: (1) standard RDF-based SPARQL, de-facto standardized Labeled Property Graphs (LPG) with Apache [TinkerPop] Gremlin and (3) proprietary LPGs, where Neo4j's Cypher holds a uniquely strong leadership position. Neo4j does everything they can to draw attention away from the two previous categories, but the fact is that the world does not need GQL - it needs adopters to join one of the two first-mentioned camps. Whatever happens in the third camp will only be smoke-and-mirrors, because at the end of the day ...when you hit a road-block with GQL the dominant answer will be "Switch to Cypher".

    Now, please don't get me wrong: If you look at it from an isolated point-of-view, Ne4j has done a MARVELOUS job with their offering! Nobody can get you as far as fast as Neo4j! But where do they actually get you? Well, they bring you into a proprietary corner (so that you need to keep paying them in order to utilize your own organization's data, because it's LOCKED into Neo4j). And Neo4j will always have "an even better" offering; Cypher. That is why I claim that this is all smoke-and-mirrors.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like