From the Semantics TF: rdf:states

Hi,
on Friday we discussed about the possible extension of the baseline with a rdf:states property, which basically is like rdf:reifies but it assumes that the triple term holds in the graph as well.
The exact syntax and semantics of the extension is defined in:
https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/wiki/Extending-the-baseline-with-"asserted"-stuff
together with some observations, which I paste below:


° It has been suggested that this extension could be more suitable to extend RDFS and not RDF, since reasoning similar to rdfs:subClassOf is needed to complete the graph and to support the entailment regime.


° It has been suggested that rdf:states rdfs:subPropertyOf rdf:reifies. should hold in RDFS.


° It has been suggested that the mapping between RDF-star and LPGs<https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/wiki/RDF-star-and-LPGs> should use rdf:states instead rdf:reifies; but this introduces the possibly incomprehensible behaviour that distinct edges with the same label (type) between the same node identifiers will correspond to a unique triple in the edge, e.g.,

:e111 rdf:states <<( :john :worksFor :A )>>.
:e222 rdf:states <<( :john :worksFor :A )>>.
:e111 :sal 100K.
:e222 :sal 200K.


will induce the unique triple in the graph:

:john :worksFor :A.



° It has been suggested that the annotation syntax in Turtle could be mapped into rdf:states instead of rdf:reifies.

Advantages and disadvantages have been discussed, and it is not clear whether we really want this extension or not.
—e.