expanding work from quoted triples to graph terms

The charter of this working group is very explicit its goal is to add quoted 
triples to RDF, and no other additions.  Renaming this new construct to triple 
terms is a reasonable change as all it does is change terminology and not 
implementation.  But my view is that expanding from quoted triples to quoted 
graphs or graph terms is a major expansion.  I'm not against this expansion 
but I believe that the working group should first do the work that it is 
chartered to do and only then explore something else.

So what else is needed to add triple terms to the RDF documents (ignoring the 
SPARQL documents for now)?   As far as I can tell the only technical work for 
the RDF documents that remains is semantics.   But semantics appears to be 
dependent of use cases.

So my suggestion is that the working group take a look at the use cases (and 
potentially submit new use cases) and determine which ones the working group 
will support.  Then a semantics that supports these use cases can be devised. 
Once this is done then the working group can look at graph terms if it so decides.

There is also SPARQL work to be done and this should also be prioritized over 
work on graph terms.

peter

Received on Thursday, 19 October 2023 16:56:09 UTC