- From: Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org>
- Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2024 17:42:25 +0000
- To: RDF-star Working Group <public-rdf-star-wg@w3.org>
In the Semantics TF (2024-02-16) https://www.w3.org/2024/02/16-rdf-star-minutes.html ---- Enrico presented updated semantics covering option 3 https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/wiki/RDF%E2%80%90star-semantics:-option-3 The link to the PDF color-codes the parts which are additions to RDF 1.1 semantics, for "triple" in the abstract data model (option 3) and separately for "triple occurrence". ---- There are a number things the WG needs to choose names for: * "triple term" * "triple occurrence" * rdf:nameOf ... and agreeing naming is hard. It was generally thought that "rdf:nameOf" is not a good choice. Some suggestions, amongst others, for rdf:nameOf are: rdf:hasTriple rdf:refersTo There would be a class "rdf:Triple" which is the range of this predicate. ---- In the same way we have a name "annotation syntax" for concrete syntax :s :p :o {| :q :z |} . we also need a name for the concrete syntax in Turtle that is: << e | s p o >> Andy ---- Background: == Option 3: https://htmlpreview.github.io/?https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/blob/main/docs/seeking-consensus-2024-01.html == The "consensus" syntax the WG has been working with: """ There seems also to be consensus about a Turtle syntax for edges: << :e | :s :p :o >> :a :b . and its variants: # syntactic sugar for << [] | :s :p :o >> :a :b . << :s :p :o >> :a :b . # syntactic sugar for :s :p :o. << :e | :s :p :o >> :a :b . :s :p :o {| :e | :a :b |}. # syntactic sugar for :s :p :o {| [] | :a :b |}. :s :p :o {| :a :b |}. """
Received on Friday, 16 February 2024 17:42:31 UTC