- From: Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org>
- Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2023 20:59:45 +0000
- To: Thomas Lörtsch <tl@rat.io>
- Cc: RDF-star Working Group <public-rdf-star-wg@w3.org>
On 14/12/2023 19:46, Thomas Lörtsch wrote:
>
>
>> On 14. Dec 2023, at 19:21, Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>
> A misunderstanding: I’m proposing that the triple ':liz :spouse :dick .' doesn’t have to be added to be asserted. Instead the property rdfx:assertionOf asserts it, like owl:imports asserts a referenced ontology in the importing graph.
(Turtle)
If we allow zero annotation triples, that could be what
:liz :spouse :dick {| id | |} .
does. Tidy that by allowing the extra "|" to be omitted
:liz :spouse :dick {| id |} .
I don't know how a property with side-effects would fit into RDF semantics.
> Because the property asserts the statement and adds an identifier to that occurrence it is possible to know exactly to which occurrence an annotation belongs (also if it is actually intended to be asserted or not, because if not, use another property like e.g. rdfx:quotes).
>
>
>> because it wasn't in the description that started this:
>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star-wg/2023Dec/0024.html
>>
>> As the original CG annotation syntax did assert, I assumed it was implied to happen as well.
>>
>> Andy
>>
>
Received on Thursday, 14 December 2023 20:59:52 UTC