- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2024 08:53:36 -0400
- To: public-rdf-star-wg@w3.org
The problem with annotating triples directly is that RDF graphs are sets, not
multi-sets, so there is at most one triple with a given subject, predicate,
and object in an RDF graph.
If annotations were directly attached to the triple, then
:e1 :influenced :e2 {| :strength 50, :source :s1 |}.
:e1 :influenced :e2 {| :strength 100, :source :s2 |} .
would conflate the strength and the source.
Most of the use cases enumerated in
https://github.com/w3c/rdf-ucr/wiki/Summary need this kind of separation.
But I suppose that the WG could reverse course and decide that this was
acceptable and require that these problems be overcome by using something like;
:e1 :influenced :e2 {| :support [:strength 50, :source :s1] |}.
peter
> Am 12. April 2024 09:03:22 MESZ schrieb "Sasaki, Felix" <felix.sasaki@sap.com>:
>>Hi Souri and all,
>>
>>We did not discuss this during the call yesterday. It would be great to get feedback from others on the list.
>>
>>About
>>
>>:e3 rdf:reifies <<( e1 :influenced :e2 )>> .
>>
>>I continue to ask what use case is behind this additional layer of reification. With
>>
>>e1 :influenced :e2
>>
>>I can easily query all edges that have been influenced by each other. Why do I need another reification?
>
Received on Friday, 12 April 2024 12:53:42 UTC