Work going forward

Folks,

Unfortunately I will miss today’s call.

I have been thinking of the big work items for the next several weeks, and how to get the work accomplished. For things that need to be addressed, we have at least the following:


  1.  Semantics: We must accomplish at least the following broad goals: a) RDF-star must be a KR language, this implies that we take a solid formal approach to semantics, and b) RDF-star must remain flexible for those people who want to use RDF (and/or have been using it) in a less formal manner. I think suggestions that would require major changes to how RDF is used are pretty much non-starters. As for semantics, I think that (based on some things I have learned from Peter P-S), perhaps we do not need to delve into modal logics after all.
  2.  Schema definition: In order for RDF-star to be useful in schema/ontology definition, we need new vocabulary, effectively an extension of RDF-Schema. What are the best practices in incorporating RDF-star into schema definition? We need to establish those, and I am afraid that looking into labeled property graphs for answers is futile, given that there really are no schema languages for LPGs. Of course, RDF-star will be very useful for “cross-cutting” aspects like provenance, but even there we may need to be able to do some modeling.

For administrative things (like naming, repositories, etc.), I suggest that we form task groups (of volunteers) to address them, because I do not want the whole WG’s time in meetings to be spent on these.

Thoughts?

Ora

--
Dr. Ora Lassila
Principal Technologist, Amazon Neptune