Re: RDF-star semantics: option 3 (first DRAFT)



> On 16 Feb 2024, at 16:24, Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Presumably the bluish and redish parts in the definition of I+A should encompass not just the if conditions but the entire lines.

of course

> There isn't anything to say how to split up triple terms and triple occurrences.  It's probably easier to just say t.s is a tripleOccurrence id s p o and not bother with the accessors.

?

> It looks as if the triple occurrence semantics is missing an ID.  And then that part could be replaced with [I+A](x) as appropriate.  That is unless there is supposed to be a difference between
> 
> s p o .
> o rdf:nameOf <<( a b c )>>.
> 
> and
> 
> s p <<o | a b c>> .

?

—e.

Received on Friday, 16 February 2024 15:40:29 UTC