We will 100% consider it and have been engaging with the community about the best approach. Cypher is by far the biggest graph query language and they seem to have the most weight in the conversation so far, but we are going to try to represent datalog as far as possible. Even if woql isn't the end result we think datalog it is the best basis for graph query so we'll keep banging the drum (especially as most people realize that composability is so important)
Or, heck, Cypher (with SQL itself, and most other languages, ISO didn't change the name even though the spec they adopted didn't necessarily exactly match what existed previously, they kept the name of the existing language they were standardizing.)
I think even Cosmos as number 2 might be misleading here, as Cosmos is a multi-model product and db engines doesn't distinguish between graph and non-graph use in the ranking.
(Same for ArangoDB)
AQL is a vendor-specific multi model language that lately has picked up some ideas from openCypher, like pattern matching.
GQL is a project for creating an International Standard language in the process of being created by experts from many countries that represent the interests of multiple vendors.
SPARQL requires buy-in into the world of the semantic web even when all you want to do is store and query graph data.
Also, property graphs wouldn't have managed to get the traction they have if SPARQL would have been sufficient. SPARQL simply suffers from being designed in a way that does not sufficiently address the needs of application developers, in expressivity, ease of use, let alone allowing easy migration of existing relational data by sharing the same type system with SQL.
Not true at all. You can query an RDF dataset with SPARQL and not have any RDFS/OWL schema. A schema/ontology/vocabulary gives you a domain model, but it’s optional.
Standards happen when the time is right. Property graphs have been in the making and matured for the last 10+ years, driven by Neo4j, other vendors, and the community and are going to stay. It's a sign of success that the SQL standards committee recognized this development by starting the GQL project.
The GQL project just started. Since it is going to be an ISO standard, the specification is only available for members while under development but may be purchased from ISO once final (Same as for SQL, though you can find copies on the internet).
GQL will be a declarative language in the spirit of existing property graph query languages like Cypher, so that gives you an idea. I'm sure as the project proceeds, various artefacts (software or otherwise) will become freely available.
If you want to dig deeper, gqlstandards.org links to some documents that are copyright Neo4j and have been submitted to the standards process.
that's nothing new. draft versions are usually released for free, but the final ISO standards have always required fees for access and the copyright for the documents belongs to ISO. a standard for the C programming language, for example, will run about $200. average developers don't usually need access to the standard, as they will be working with an implementation of the standard anyway (which should be providing its own documentation).
