Re: Consolidating triple/edges -- named occurrence version

On 4 Jan 2024, at 22:55, Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net> wrote:
My takeaway from today’s conversation makes a triple occurrence such as << wed-1 | :liz :spouse :richard >> be more like syntactic sugar for :wed-1 rdf:occurrenceOf << :liz :spouse :richard >> (where << :liz :spouse :richard >> is a triple term not occurrence). Furthermore, the semantics could impose a restriction that a triple term can only be used as the object of a triple with predicate rdf:occurrenceOf, otherwise it is considered invalid.

Yes, but if you allow triples with property rdf:occurrenceOf and object a triple term then you need to:

  *   explain what is the denotation of triple terms, in addition to explain what is the denotation of triple occurrences (i.e., the subjects of such triples);
  *   explain what is the denotation of rdf:occurrenceOf;
  *   enforce in the semantics that the denotation of triple terms is a bijection, i.e. distinct triple terms denote distinct resources, and distinct resources are the denotation of distinct triple terms.

I find the above unnecessary complications.
—e.