- From: Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org>
- Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2023 20:47:19 +0000
- To: RDF-star Working Group <public-rdf-star-wg@w3.org>
Looking at the examples here and from the Semantics TF, it seems that
the visual similarity of
<<:s :p :o >>
as a term and
<<| n | :s :p :o >>
as an occurrence can be confusing. It is too easy to write
a term when meaning an occurrence.
Suggested modification:
<<( :s :p :o )>>
is the triple term.
This frees up
<< :s :p :o >>
to be an occurrence with a fresh bnode as name.
This would otherwise be "<<| [] | :s :p :o >>" or
"<<| | :s :p :o >>".
It seems likely to me tat this is a common pattern when the triple isn't
asserted.
So we have:
Occurrence:
<< :s :p :o >>
<<| N | :s :p :o >>
Triple term:
<<( :s :p :o )>>
Annotation:
:s :p :o {| :p :z |}
:s :p :o {| N | :p :z |}
(the last one is fiddly in the grammar because simply writing in ABNF is
ambiguous for some parsers)
Andy
Received on Monday, 18 December 2023 20:47:27 UTC