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

> On 30. Nov 2023, at 13:57, Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 27/11/2023 21:37, Thomas Lörtsch wrote:
>> I think it has been established that most use cases can be characterized
>>  as annotating tokens, not types (if that still isn’t common wisdom then
>>  that would be a very important discussion to have first).
> 
> For proposals that do not also include types in the data model -
> 
> Can there be two different tokens of the same type in a single graph? How?

RDF standard reification describes one token per reigfication quad and you can describe infinitely many tokens in one graph. Of course the graph is a set, but that is early optimization :)

In the nested graph proposal each token has its own identifier, because they are based on named graphs, which are tokens (perfectly possible for two graphs to have the same same content, but different name)

Check "3.1. Challenge #1: Edge Properties, Multiple Edge Instances, and Reification" in "The OneGraph Vision: Challenges of Breaking the Graph Model Lock-In", 2023, Lassila et al [0] for a use case

> Conversely, can multiple triples refer to the same token
> with requiring specific syntax (c.f Turtle ";")
> 
> With type and a triple to relate token and type, both are possible and it is preserved on RDF merge.

Yes, but it assumes that everybody will first create a reference to the token (via a new triple) instead of just annotating the type. And that in practice is a quite unreasonable assumption.


>    Andy

Thomas

[0] https://content.iospress.com/articles/semantic-web/sw223273&hl=en&sa=T&oi=gsb-ggp&ct=res&cd=0&d=16666059864973320262&ei=IaloZfu3OrKey9YPyMm8yA8&scisig=AFWwaeZbqxIIkVJxn-4m3LZzXFU2

Received on Thursday, 30 November 2023 15:33:22 UTC