Advertisement

A Formal Model for RDF Dataset Constraints

  • Harold Solbrig
  • Eric Prud’hommeaux
  • Christopher G. Chute
  • Jim Davies
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8388)

Abstract

Linked Data has forged new ground in developing easy-to-use, distributed databases. The prevalence of this data has enabled a new genre of social and scientific applications. At the same time, Semantic Web technology has failed to significantly displace SQL or XML in industrial applications, in part because it offers no equivalent schema publication and enforcement mechanisms to ensure data consistency. The RDF community has recognized the need for a formal mechanism to publish verifiable assertions about the structure and content of RDF Graphs, RDF Datasets and related resources. We propose a formal model that could serve as a foundation for describing the various types invariants, pre- and post-conditions for RDF datasets and then demonstrate how the model can be used to analyze selected example constraints.

Keywords

RDF RDF Graph RDF Dataset Validation Formal schema Invariants RDF validation Z specification language 

References

  1. 1.
    Joint Technical Committee ISO/IEC JTC 1. Information Technology - Z formal specification notation - Syntax, type system, and semantics (2002)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Carothers, G., Seaborne, A.: TriG: Rdf dataset language. World Wide Web Consortium, Last Call Working Draft 19 September 2013Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cyganiak, R., Wood, D.: RDF 1.1 concepts and abstract syntax. World Wide Web Consortium, Working Draft WD-rdf11-concepts-20130723, August 2013Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cyganiak, R., Wood, D.: RDF 1.1 concepts and abstract syntax - generalized rdf triples, graphs, and datasets. World Wide Web Consortium, Working Draft WD-rdf11-concepts-20130723, August 2013Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Johnson, D., Speicher, S.: OSLC open services for lifecycle collaboration core specification version 2.0. OSLC Specification (web page), May 2013Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Isaac, A., Summers, E.: SKOS simple knowledge organization system primer. World Wide Web Consortium, Note NOTE-skos-primer-20090818, August 2009Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    David, A.: Schmidt. Denotational semantics - A methodology for language development, On line image (1997)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Spivey, J.M.: The Fuzz Manual. Computing Science Consultancy, Oxford (1988)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    W3C OWL Working Group. OWL 2 web ontology language – document overview (second edition). World Wide Web Consortium, Recommendation REC-owl2-overview-20121211, December 2012Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    W3C SPARQL Working Group. SPARQL 1.1 overview. World Wide Web Consortium, Recommendation REC-sparql11-overview-20130321, March 2013Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Woodcock, J., Davies, J.: Using Z. Specification, Refinement, and Proof. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River (1996)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Harold Solbrig
    • 1
  • Eric Prud’hommeaux
    • 2
  • Christopher G. Chute
    • 1
  • Jim Davies
    • 3
  1. 1.Mayo ClinicRochesterUSA
  2. 2.World Wide Web ConsortiumCambridgeUSA
  3. 3.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations