skip to main content
10.1145/2187980.2187997acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageswwwConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Binary RDF for scalable publishing, exchanging and consumption in the web of data

Published:16 April 2012Publication History

ABSTRACT

The Web of Data is increasingly producing large RDF datasets from diverse fields of knowledge, pushing the Web to a data-to-data cloud. However, traditional RDF representations were inspired by a document-centric view, which results in verbose/redundant data, costly to exchange and post-process. This article discusses an ongoing doctoral thesis addressing efficient formats for publication, exchange and consumption of RDF on a large scale. First, a binary serialization format for RDF, called HDT, is proposed. Then, we focus on compressed rich-functional structures which take part of efficient HDT representation as well as most applications performing on huge RDF datasets.

References

  1. Notation3. W3C Design Issues. 1998. http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Notation3.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. RDF/XML Syntax Specification (Revised). W3C Recommendation. 2004. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-syntax-grammar/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. SPARQL Query Language for RDF. W3C Recommendation. 2008. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Turtle - Terse RDF Triple Language. W3C Team Submission. 2008. http://www.w3.org/TeamSubmission/turtle/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Efficient XML Interchange (EXI) Format 1.0. W3C Candidate Recommendation. 2009. http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/CR-exi-20091208/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Binary RDF Representation for Publication and Exchange (HDT). W3C Member Submission. 2011. http://www.w3.org/Submission/2011/03/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. D. Abadi, A. Marcus, S. Madden, and K. Hollenbach. SW-Store: a vertically partitioned DBMS for Semantic Web data management.The VLDB Journal, 18:385--406, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. K. Alexander. RDF in JSON: A Specification for serialising RDF in JSON. In SFSW, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. K. Alexander, R. Cyganiak, M. Hausenblas, and J. Zhao. Describing Linked Datasets-On the Design and Usage of voiD, the 'Vocabulary of Interlinked Datasets'. In LDOW at WWW, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. S. Alvarez Garcia, N. Brisaboa, J. Fernandez, and M. Martinez-Prieto. Compressed k2-Triples for Full-In-Memory RDF Engines. In AMCIS, paper 350, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. M. Arias, J. Fernandez, M. Martinez-Prieto, and C. Gutierrez. HDT-it: Storing, Sharing and Visualizing Huge RDF Datasets. In ISWC, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. M. Atre, V. Chaoji, M. Zaki, and J. Hendler. Matrix "Bit" loaded: a scalable lightweight join query processor for RDF data. In WWW, pages 41--50, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. C. Bizer, T. Heath, K. Idehen, and T. Berners-Lee. Linked Data On the Web (LDOW2008). In WWW, pages 1265--1266, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. N. Brisaboa, R. Canovas, F. Claude, M. A. Martinez-Prieto, and G. Navarro. Compressed String Dictionaries. In SEA, pages 136--147, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. R. Cyganiak, H. Stenzhorn, R. Delbru, S. Decker, and G. Tummarello. Semantic sitemaps: Efficient and flexible access to datasets on the semantic web. In ESWC, pages 690--704. Springer-Verlag, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. L. Ding and T. Finin. Characterizing the Semantic Web on the Web. In RISC, pages 242--257, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. J. Fernandez, C. Gutierrez, and M. Martinez-Prieto. RDF compression: basic approaches. In WWW, pages 1091--1092, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. J. Fernandez, M. Martinez-Prieto, and C. Gutierrez. Compact Representation of Large RDF Data Sets for Publishing and Exchange. In ISWC, pages 193--208, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. R. Gonzalez, S. Grabowski, V. Makinen, and G. Navarro. Practical Implementation of Rank and Select Queries. In WEA, pages 27--38, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. C. Gutierrez, C. Hurtado, A. Mendelzon, and J. Perez. Foundations of semantic web databases.J COMPUT SYST SCI, 77:520--541, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. T. Heath and C. Bizer.Linked Data: Evolving the Web into a Global Data Space. Morgan & Claypool, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. W. Hu, J. Chen, H. Zhang, and Y. Qu. How Matchable Are Four Thousand Ontologies on the Semantic Web. In ESWC, pages 290--304, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. D. Le-Phuoc, J. X. Parreira, V. Reynolds, and M. Hauswirth. RDF On the Go : An RDF Storage and Query Processor for Mobile Devices. In ISWC, 2010. Available athttp://iswc2010.semanticweb.org/pdf/503.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. M. Martinez-Prieto, J. Fernandez, and R. Canovas. Compression of RDF Dictionaries. In SAC, pages 1841--1848, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. G. Navarro and V. Makinen. Compressed Full-Text Indexes. ACM Computing Surveys, 39(1):art. 2, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. T. Neumann and G. Weikum. The RDF-3X engine for scalable management of RDF data. The VLDB Journal, 19, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. M. Schmidt, M. Meier, and G. Lausen. Foundations of SPARQL query optimization. In ICDT, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. L. Sidirourgos, R. Goncalves, M. Kersten, N. Nes, and S. Manegold. Column-Store Support for RDF Data Management: not all Swans are White.VLDB Endowment, 1(2):1553--1563, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Y. Theoharis, Y. Tzitzikas, D. Kotzinos, and V. Christophides. On Graph Features of Semantic Web Schemas.IEEE Trans. on Know. and Data Engineering, 20(5):692--702, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. J. Urbani, J. Maassen, and H. Bal. Massive Semantic Web data compression with MapReduce. In HPDC 2010, pages 795--802, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. I. H. Witten, A. Moffat, and T. C. Bell. Managing Gigabytes: Compressing and Indexing Documents and Images. Morgan Kaufmann, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Binary RDF for scalable publishing, exchanging and consumption in the web of 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 Other conferences
            WWW '12 Companion: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on World Wide Web
            April 2012
            1250 pages
            ISBN:9781450312301
            DOI:10.1145/2187980

            Copyright © 2012 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: 16 April 2012

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • research-article

            Acceptance Rates

            Overall Acceptance Rate1,899of8,196submissions,23%

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader