[cyocum]

I am glad to see this as well. I decided to use RDF for my personal project because it was well specified, has many implementations, and a human readable syntax. In the end, it is just data but I wanted to make it as accessible as possible. Does this mean that RDF is always the right choice? No, but it worked for my use case. I wish there were more choices in the open source Triplestore space with good OWL2 support but my project works with what is out there and if someone wants to transform it into something else, that is entirely possible to do.

If you are interested, my project is here: https://github.com/cyocum/irish-gen and a few posts about it are here https://cyocum.github.io/.

[tracerbulletx]

My impression is that the trade off when choosing RDF vs a property graph when trying to model graph data is between maximal schema flexibility and the ability to infinitely break apart the data model down to the smallest atomic structures because literally everything is a node that is either an IRI(as unique identifier) or a primitive. Vs the convenience of having more complex nodes and edges with some structure built in where you can collapse some fields down and call them properties to describe individual nodes and edges. In RDF you have to create all of that yourself with triples which can lead to some large structures for relatively common tasks like referencing edges and for reification of statements.

[p_l]

RDF-star, which is part of the new draft, extends RDF with property graph support (with accompanying change in SPARQL as SPARQL-star)