Modal predication vs reification

Hi,
I’m sorry I had a busy week, and I even was unable to read the latest messages in the list.
Anyway, let me quickly write down an example of my argument, which wants to distinguish between modal predication and reification.

This is an example of modal predication:

:john    :believes      < :messi :scores :last-WC22-goal >.
:sue     :is-told-that  < :messi :scores :last-WC22-goal >.

Here, the fact < :messi :scores :last-WC22-goal > is something which is true in the “modal world" which :john believes in, and in the world which :sue is told. Semantically, the predicates :believes and :is-told-that introduce a new distinct “modal world” each, which contains the RDF models of the triple(s) object of the predication. So, there is no resource corresponding to the triple < :messi :scores :last-WC22-goal >, neither in the current world/graph nor in the predicated worlds.
Capturing the notion of modal predication is hard in RDF, and it is definitely out of the scope of this WG.

On the other hand, the following is an example of reification:

:doha    :place-of      < :messi :scores :last-WC22-goal >.
:ball123 :instrument-of < :messi :scores :last-WC22-goal >.

Here, the fact < :messi :scores :last-WC22-goal > is (1) true in the current world/graph, and (2) it corresponds to the existence of a resource over which we can predicate additional facts. This resource represents the event described by the triple. Indeed, in the example above, both triples refer in object position to the same resource, corresponding to the reification of the event < :messi :scores :last-WC22-goal >.

I guess that this will sparkle a discussion…
cheers
—e.