>> And >> [INAUDIBLE]
>> Yeah. >> [INAUDIBLE]
>> It cannot replace. You, this is one way of evaluating
pattern queries, right? >> You can do that.
>> [INAUDIBLE] >> Clearly.
Yeah, yeah. I mean, rarely is the case that you have
a free lucnh, right? so, you cannot have the cake and eat it
too, is exemplified from the fact that in many settings, your click constructions
are not good enough. Linked open data for example the answer
can be one. I can, I mean we can discuss this later
on. And then the kind of queries you can get,
are not making use of the clique structure, or the community structure as
you can see. We, we can work this out, I mean, I'll
show you some example >> [INAUDIBLE] Yeah.
[COUGH] >> [INAUDIBLE]
>> No, no, here you are looking for some cliques, all right?
It does not mean that, every community need not be a clique.
>> [INAUDIBLE] >> One of them, all right?
>> [INAUDIBLE] >> Sure.
>> [INAUDIBLE] >> Perfectly right.
>> [INAUDIBLE] >> Exactly.
But if your query workload >> Consists not of click, but of some
of the triangles. Then your clicks are no longer really
useful. >> [INAUDIBLE]
>> Yeah. >> [INAUDIBLE]
>> So, since you don't know what kind of query workload you're expecting, you
need to come up with something that works in general.
That's really the challenge. Okay?
So now, these graph problems as we had studied in our high school and undergrad
was largely without addition of labels on these edges and notes.
So clearly SPARQL has the additional constraint of groundings and constraints
that you may have on the limits. >> When we are talking about the LOB,
how do you [UNKNOWN] but how do you realistically capture the whole thing?
>> You cannot. >> You cannot?
>> By I mean. >> Keep it updated?
>> Exactly, by definition you cannot. So that's why, you have to go back to the
good old federated query processing solution, which again, database guys
worked on earlier. But now with added twists that.
So, in fact, there is a lot going on, on that front as well.
So you have this big LOD, nobody wants to give the data to you.
Everybody wants to maintain their data, to later keep the quality.
They will only expose a sparke interface to you.
>> [INAUDIBLE] >> Exactly, they can have anything.
Now given a query how do you decompose in such a way that each one can run
separately and then put them together? >> Maybe you can [INAUDIBLE]
[INAUDIBLE] >> Yeah.
>> [INAUDIBLE] But the any database [INAUDIBLE]
>> Yes. I mean, for example, music prints.
Doesn't allow the database to be, because it's a very valuable data source.
Why would they want to part with it? They make money on it.
>> Okay. so.
>> [INAUDIBLE] open this. >> Open this, because they are low
SPARQL endpoints. You can access the data without paying
any extra fees. That's not an issue.
They want. >> it's probably.
>> Yeah. But they have restrictions on what kind
of SPARQL cannot. So in order to put.
>> Yeah. [INAUDIBLE].
>> [INAUDIBLE] [CROSSTALK]. >> Exactly, you cannot just say,
question mark, question mark, question mark.
Just give everything. >> I try my fields, work, fields,
texts, plurals. >> Yeah, yeah.
I mean, so there are some conditions under which you can be part of [UNKNOWN]
Consortium, but these conditions are relatively loose.
They allow for maintaining your IT, all right, I mean these are.
>> It's not so open anymore. >> This is the closest to open you can
get. >> Oh.
>> Okay [LAUGH]. So as open as you can get.
>> As open as you can get. >> Yeah.
You have to balance money versus freedom, okay?
>> Of course [INAUDIBLE]. >> [INAUDIBLE].
>> But, but we know,
[INAUDIBLE].
>> And more is [INAUDIBLE]? >> Yes.
>> And that is not small? >> That's not small.
>> That's not small? >> Yeah, yeah.
At least for research it's not small. For Google it's trivial but for research
it's a failry huge data set, right? >> [INAUDIBLE]
Okay, thanks a lot. [SOUND]