Re: Problems with unrestricted usage of syntax in option 3

On 16/02/2024 16:59, Franconi Enrico wrote:
> Problems arising with unrestricted usage of syntax in option 3, due to 
> an implicit meaning given to /triple terms/ and to the /rdf:nameof/ 
> property:
>
> Implicit equalities in RDF entailment:
>
> <( :s1 :p1  "42"^^xsd:integer )> :p :o .
> /*entails and is entailed by*/
> <( :s1 :p1 "042"^^xsd:integer )> :p :o .
>
> <( :s1 :p1 :o1 )> :p :o .
> <( :s2 :p1 :o1 )> owl:same-as _:b .
> :s1 owl:same-as :s2 .
> /*entails*/
> _:b :p :o .
>
> *What is the meaning of:*
> _:b rdf:nameof _:b .
> <( :s1 :p1 :o1 )> rdf:nameof "42"^^xsd:integer .
>
> I suspect that with a well-formedness condition such as "tripleTerms 
> can only appear as objects of /rdf:nameOf/ triples, which can have 
> only tripleTerms as objects" we could avoid these problems.
> I strongly believe also that nobody is ever interested to write 
> non-well-formed RDF graphs.
> But if we do assume this condition, then why not having natively 
> triple occurrences (i.e., NOT as a macro) and avoid completely the 
> rdf:nameOf property:
> << :wed-1 | :liz :spouse :richard >>
> :starts 1964 ;
> :ends 1974 .
>
Putting named occurrences into the data model gives two RDF terms that 
give an ":e" name as a subject or object for SPARQL matching.

Combing declaration and usage into one step << :e | :s :p :o>> doesn't work:

# Declare and use
<< :e | :s :p :o>> :q0 :z0 .
# then Use
:e :q1 :z1 .

!=

# Declare and use
<< :e | :s :p :o>> :q1 :z1 .
# then use
:e :q0 :z0 .

Neither is a result of SELECT * { ?X :q1 :z1 . ?X :q0 :z0 } unless there 
is a special case added.

WIth rdf:nameOf giving the relationship, there would be :e in each case.

The option 3 origin used the name "descriptor" specifically to not say 
"triple term" after your previous responses to the first consolidation 
proposal (Dec/23) 
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star-wg/2023Dec/0033.html

      Andy


> —e.
>
>