Neo4j
There is a wall that separates the Graph Databases and the RDF & Semantics worlds. A significant portion of the bricks in this wall are made of misconceptions and assumptions that need to be clarified, and the reality is that analysts and vendors have historically failed to help in this task.
JESÚS BARRASA PHD, NEO4J FIELD ENGINEER .
The speaker, instead of making an unbiased comparison, is advertising Neo4j. OWL is rather a standardization: a standard language for describing ontologies and thus captures semantics. No one says it is the only way of describing semantics (for example, one can use rule languages for many purposes). But one thing is for sure, it is a well researched area and OWL has it's root deep in logic formalisms (description logics e.g.).
If one is not happy with scalibility in OWL, try not to use OWL2DL rather depending on requirements, choose one of OWL-RL, OWL-EL and OWL-QL. Until and unless, Neo4j bases its semantics features on some mathematical formalism, one can't make a comparison between OWL and Neo4j on semantics level.
Thank you for de-mystifying Neo4J, knowledge graphs, RDF and OWL. Very helpful!
Is this the project you are referring to in your github repository?
https://github.com/jbarrasa/neosemantics
Hi, i found this talk really interesting, thanks for the clear descriptions. There are a few talks from this chap and i like the delivery and the fact he tackles things head on. I'm at the beginning of my journey learning about graphs and such, but this stuff is helpful
Found it biased, specially that you first talk about how things are "hacked" for RDF and then you attempt to "hack" Neo4j for Semantics. I get it, you are Neo4j and need to sell your product but try to sell your product where it should be sold! Neo4j is a wonderful product for what it is don't cloud it by trying to be things it is not.