Re: Semantic Predication: 1 - basic distinctions

Yes that's true  ...but only if Enrico's intention was indeed to use :spouse-1 and :spouse-2 as unique property names, which I am not sure of. Hence my question.

Olaf

Feb 16, 2023 20:36:07 Souripriya Das <souripriya.das@oracle.com>:

> The use of :spouse-1 and :spouse-2 as unique property names that are rdfs:subPropertyOf the main property :spouse is similar to one of the three approaches described in [1]. It is similar in idea to singleton properties but utilizes the preexisting property rdfs:subPropertyOf instead of requiring a new special property called rdf:singletonPropertyOf.
> 
> [1] https://openproceedings.org/EDBT/2014/edbticdt2014industrial_submission_28.pdf[https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fopenproceedings.org%2FEDBT%2F2014%2Fedbticdt2014industrial_submission_28.pdf&data=05%7C01%7Colaf.hartig%40liu.se%7C5eb5c17ffaf842b75d4508db1054fa21%7C913f18ec7f264c5fa816784fe9a58edd%7C0%7C0%7C638121729668881492%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=g%2FCqQaeDqEcxAsHsCwnujNZkmWhRLoKTErQtbHLfWSE%3D&reserved=0]
> ----------------------------------------
> *From:* Olaf Hartig <olaf.hartig@liu.se>
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 16, 2023 1:37 PM
> *To:* tl@rat.io <tl@rat.io>; franconi@inf.unibz.it <franconi@inf.unibz.it>
> *Cc:* public-rdf-star-wg@w3.org <public-rdf-star-wg@w3.org>
> *Subject:* [External] : Re: Semantic Predication: 1 - basic distinctions
>  
> Hi Enrico,
> 
> Regarding Singleton Properties, I am not actually sure that your idea with the :spouse-1 and :spouse-2 properties in
> your example was the same as the idea of Singleton Properties (as Thomas' comment suggests it was). Or maybe it was?
> 
> To understand whether it was or not, let me ask you the following question. Was your intention with the :spouse-1
> property to represent a "first-spouse" relationship that can also be used between other couples? In other words, was
> your intended meaning of :spouse-1 such that, in addition to the triple (:liz, :spouse-1, :richard), there could also be
> a triple such as (:alice, :spouse-1, :bob)?
> 
> If that's the case, then this is something else than Singleton Properties.
> 
> Best,
> Olaf
> 
> 
> On tor, 2023-02-16 at 16:39 +0000, Franconi Enrico wrote:
>> > On 16 Feb 2023, at 16:01, Franconi Enrico <franconi@inf.unibz.it> wrote:
>> >
>> > > In the last example on semantic predicatins in eMail nr. 2 you use properties ":spouse-1" and ":spouse-2", defined
>> > > as subproperties of ":spouse". Note that here you are employing the Singleton Property approach and wouldn't need
>> > > quoted triples at all. But, because quoted triples reference the type, practically all your examples could face
>> > > the same need to account for a multiplicity of annotations. Ergo Singleton Properties might be the better approach
>> > > after all.
>> >
>> > I don’t know where to read in order to understand what the Singleton Property is (my fault, sorry…).
>>
>> OK, I’m studying now the singleton property in Vinh Nguyen, Amit P. Sheth: Logical Inferences with Contexts of RDF
>> Triples (2017) [and previous references]; I’m not sure we need all that machinery, but some of the syntactic choices
>> are appealing.
>> I’l go deeper.
>> —e.