- From: James Anderson <anderson.james.1955@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2023 15:19:58 +0100
- To: RDF-star WG <public-rdf-star-wg@w3.org>
good afternoon doerthe; > On 30. Nov 2023, at 13:21, Doerthe Arndt <doerthe.arndt@tu-dresden.de> wrote: > > Dear Thomas, > > This is a very long mail covering a lot of topics and as I am afraid that this will also result in many responses targeting different topics you touched. Maybe we should structure your questions and discuss them one by one. > > Having said so, I now pick the N3 topic and try to focus on that aspect (with some exceptions, sorry, I can’t hold back :) ). > >> ... > you describe, that, > ... What Peter laid out is that there are many ways how to understand graph terms. The problem is that we will have to agree on the semantics and in order to agree, we will need a lot of discussions. This is an interesting thing to do and we should go for that, but we should go step by step: I would argue that triple terms are easier than graph terms and therefore, I would want us to first focus on the triple terms and then get further after that part of work is done. I see the danger of getting lost in discussions here and then end up with nothing at the end. if it were possible to carry this argument forward in concrete, rather than subjunctive terms, the discussion would benefit. i have followed the rdf-star effort for years, but am not aware of any concise presentation of what might be this qualitative difference between graph terms and triple terms with regards to their comprehension. best regards, from berlin, --- james anderson | james@dydra.com | https://dydra.com
Received on Thursday, 30 November 2023 14:20:17 UTC