Re: An outline of RDFn -- RDF with (auto- and custom-) names

Is RDFn the same as RDF-star?   Well, in the sense that each can encode the 
other, yes.  But this isn't a very useful sense of sameness.

More interesting is whether there is a natural correspondence between all of 
RDFn and all of RDF-star.  But there isn't, at least so far as I can ascertain 
from the information given to the working group.  RDF-star has unasserted 
triples, which RDFn appears to lack.  RDFn uses graphs with multi-edges, which 
RDF-star does not provide.

peter


On 11/26/23 22:08, Souripriya Das wrote:
> Since I did not hear any comments on RDFn during the first half of our last 
> meeting that I was able to attend (except, maybe, Gregg might have said 
> something right at the beginning but I had audio issues on my side), I thought 
> it may be helpful to mention below a few high-level points about RDFn and how 
> it is related to RDF-star concepts and syntax: ("statement" here simply means 
> "a triple or quad"):
> 
> 1) RDFn = RDF-star (which, I think, uses implicit naming in some sense, with 
> << s p o >> as the name) + explicit naming (using IRIs as custom names).
> 
> 2) RDFn (with appropriate syntactic shortcut) would appear exactly the same as 
> RDF-star to a user who does not use multi-edges or statement-sets.
> 
> 3) RDFn does not change anything regarding how users work with default graph 
> and named graphs today.
> 
> 4) RDFn requires use of explicit naming if user needs to store multi-edges. 
> For modeling multi-edges, user does not need to introduce new triples or quads 
> with special properties like :isOccurrenceOf or :hasOccurrence.
> 
> 5) RDFn requires use of explicit naming for modeling statement-sets as well. A 
> statement-set in RDFn can include (asserted or unasserted) triples from the 
> default graph and the named graphs. The custom-name of a statement-set can be 
> used for making statements about it.
> 
> Thanks,
> Souri.

Received on Monday, 27 November 2023 20:56:10 UTC