skip to main content
10.1145/3477314.3507655acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessacConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Open Access

GraphSPARQL: a GraphQL interface for linked data

Authors Info & Claims
Published:06 May 2022Publication History

ABSTRACT

In recent years, knowledge graphs have become widely adopted for storing and managing vast amounts of data, powering various applications. However, SPARQL as the query language for accessing those knowledge graphs has a steep learning curve and is too complex for many use cases. This paper presents GraphSPARQL, a middleware that allows accessing arbitrary SPARQL endpoints by using GraphQL, supporting the GraphQL operations query and mutation. GraphSPARQL abstracts the complexity of SPARQL without losing the ability to address classes and properties of distinct ontologies. Additionally, GraphSPARQL's extension to GraphQL allows using SPARQL filter operations to filter the data in queries. The evaluation showed that GraphSPARQL can compete with existing GraphQL to SPARQL solutions and outperforms them for deeply nested queries.

References

  1. Sören Auer, Christian Bizer, Georgi Kobilarov, Jens Lehmann, Richard Cyganiak, and Zachary Ives. 2007. Dbpedia: A nucleus for a web of open data. In The semantic web. Springer, 722--735.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Dan Brickley, R.V. Guha, and Brian McBride. 2014. RDF Schema 1.1. World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Enrico Daga, Luca Panziera, and Carlos Pedrinaci. 2015. Basil: A cloud platform for sharing and reusing SPARQL queries as Web APIs. In CEUR Workshop Proceedings, Vol. 1486.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Marilena Daquino, Ivan Heibi, Silvio Peroni, and David Shotton. 2021. Creating RESTful APIs over SPARQL endpoints using RAMOSE. Semantic Web 1 (2021), 1--19. arXiv:2007.16079 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Dieter Fensel, Umutcan Şimşek, Kevin Angele, Elwin Huaman, Elias Kärle, Oleksandra Panasiuk, Ioan Toma, Jürgen Umbrich, and Alexander Wahler. 2020. Knowledge Graphs: Methodology, Tools and Selected Use Cases. Springer Nature.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Daniel Garijo and Maximiliano Osorio. 2020. OBA: An Ontology-Based Framework for Creating REST APIs for Knowledge Graphs. In International Semantic Web Conference. Springer, 48--64.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Paul Groth, Antonis Loizou, Alasdair JG Gray, Carole Goble, Lee Harland, and Steve Pettifer. 2014. API-centric linked data integration: The open PHACTS discovery platform case study. Journal of web semantics 29 (2014), 12--18.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Yuanbo Guo, Zhengxiang Pan, and Jeff Heflin. 2005. LUBM: A benchmark for OWL knowledge base systems. Journal of Web Semantics 3, 2--3 (2005), 158--182.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Gregg Kellogg. 2020. JSON-LD 1.1. W3C Recommendation. W3C. https://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld11/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Holger Knublauch and Dimitris Kontokostas. 2017. Shapes Constraint Language (SHACL). World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). https://www.w3.org/TR/shacl/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Pasquale Lisena, Albert Meroño-Peñuela, Tobias Kuhn, and Raphaël Troncy. 2019. Easy web API development with SPARQL transformer. In International Semantic Web Conference. Springer, 454--470.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Robert Schaffenrath, Daniel Proksch, Markus Kopp, Iacopo Albasini, Oleksandra Panasiuk, and Anna Fensel. 2020. Benchmark for Performance Evaluation of SHACL Implementations in Graph Databases. In International Joint Conference on Rules and Reasoning. Springer, 82--96.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Amit Singhal. 2012. Introducing the Knowledge Graph: things, not strings. https://blog.google/products/search/introducing-knowledge-graph-things-not/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Ruben Taelman, Miel Vander Sande, and Ruben Verborgh. 2018. GraphQL-LD: linked data querying with GraphQL. In International Semantic Web Conference. 1--4.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Ruben Taelman, Miel Vander Sandier, and Ruben Verborgh. 2019. Bridges between GraphQL and RDF. In W3C Workshop on Web Standardization for Graph Data. W3C.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Ruben Verborgh and Ruben Taelman. 2020. LDflex: A Read/Write Linked Data Abstraction for Front-End Web Developers. In International Semantic Web Conference. Springer, 193--211.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Denny Vrandečić and Markus Krötzsch. 2014. Wikidata: a free collaborative knowledgebase. Commun. ACM 57, 10 (2014), 78--85.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. World Wide Web Consortium et al. 2012. OWL 2 web ontology language document overview. (2012). https://www.w3.org/TR/2012/REC-owl2-overview-20121211/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. GraphSPARQL: a GraphQL interface for linked data

      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
        SAC '22: Proceedings of the 37th ACM/SIGAPP Symposium on Applied Computing
        April 2022
        2099 pages
        ISBN:9781450387132
        DOI:10.1145/3477314

        Copyright © 2022 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 6 May 2022

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate1,650of6,669submissions,25%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader