Re: multiple kinds of transparency; simplicity over complexity

On 17/02/2023 13:14, Vladimir Alexiev wrote:
> I thought (or Pierre-Antoine made me to believe as he got me into this 
> ;-) that given the CG work,
> the WG "only" has to update a bunch of specs treating the CG work as a 
> "delta".
. . .
> - Over a year ago I posted a "reasoning" use case 
> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star/issues/200 that I now see is very naive.
>   - Pierre-Antoine countered with examples that <<X :connectedTo Y>> 
> cannot be transparent wrt SymmetricProperty reasoning,
>     because consider " <<X :connectedTo Y>> :elevationGainInM 15 "
>   - Last night I thought of the Hinterstoisser traverse (see 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1936_Eiger_climbing_disaster):
>     4 people were able to cross this difficult place from right to left,
>     and the belief they would not need (or would be able to) cross in 
> the opposite direction cost them their lives.
>     So if X and Y are the two ends of this traverse, then "X 
> :connectedTo Y" was not symmetric in 1936,
>     and all the way until a permanent rope was fixed on that traverse
>   - But please understand my concern: given an inference regime, new 
> triples are inferred.
>     If SOME rdf-star annotations are not carried over to those 
> triples, doesn't then rdf-star go against reasoning?

It's a good example.

As well, suppose the quoted triple of interest is some other graph.
The local inference regime does not apply in the remote graph.

It might be wrong to infer new triples if the app wishes to say exactly 
which triple it is referring to remotely:

    <<:s :p :o>> ex:source<http://host/graph1234>  .

The CG noted that while it possible to "turn on" inference (TEP), it is 
not possible to "turn off" inference.

Quoted triples are a building block, not a complete solution for all use 
cases.

     Andy

https://w3c.github.io/rdf-star/cg-spec/2021-12-17.html#selective-ref-transparency