On Wed, 22 Feb 2023 at 00:03, Kingsley Idehen via
Wikidata wrote:
On 2/21/23 4:05 PM, Guillaume Lederrey wrote:
The exposed SPARQL endpoint is at the moment a direct exposition of the
Blazegraph endpoint, so it does expose all the Blazegraph specific features
and quirks.
Is there a Query Service that's separated from the Blazegraph endpoint? The
crux of the matter here is that WDQS benefits more by being loosely- bound
to endpoints rather than tightly-bound to the Blazegraph endpoint.
>
> What we would like to do at some point (this is not more than a rough idea
> at this point) is to add a proxy in front of the SPARQL endpoint, that
> would filter specific SPARQL features, so that we limit what is available
> to a standard set of features available across most potential backends.
> This would help reduce the coupling of queries with the backend. Of course,
> this would have the drawback of limiting the feature set.
>
I have to say I am a bit concerned by this talk, since some of Blazegraph's
"features and quirks" can be exceedingly useful.
I agree that some of Blazegraph's extensions to SPARQL are useful,
particularly for me the ability to easily access Wikidata labels in my language.
But Blazegraph appears to be unmaintained. The team that developed Blazegraph
does not appear to be in a situation that they can help in fixing problems in
Blazegraph and no one else appears to be interested in fixing problems in it.
Errors and other issues with Blazegraph are negatively affecting the WDQS.
That's not a good state of affairs.
In my opinion the WDQS should be trying to get off Blazegraph.
peter