Re: Problems with unrestricted usage of syntax in option 3

OK, I understand that people may not like

  1.  a well formalness condition of restricting the use of triple terms in option 3, nor
  2.  an explicit syntax for triple occurrences in option 3.

I can live with unrestricted syntax of RTD-star with triple terms and a new rdf:nameOf predicate symbol without triple occurrences in the syntax, but with the following narrative:


  *   rdf:nameOf is explained as a sort of rdf:edge predicate, namely it is a PURELY SYNTACTICAL assignment of a label to a triple;
  *   a best practices section explains how to use this construct to represent all the discussed different cases of reification (e.g., also using a macro such as "triple occurrence”);
  *   a best practices section explains how to use this construct to represent property graph edges;
  *   a best practices section explains how to use this construct to represent n-ary relations;
  *   etc.

So, RDF-star provides the assembly language to represent any of the above (and more), only if used consistently.
I’m trying to be open :-)

—e.