- From: Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org>
- Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2024 21:44:05 +0100
- To: public-rdf-star-wg@w3.org
Likely regrets for the meeting.
Andy
On 04/07/2024 10:53, Thomas Lörtsch wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> will we have a Semantics/Use Cases TF meeting tomorrow? I'd like to continue the discussion about unasserted assertions from last Friday.
>
> In a reply to Niklas from Monday [0] I Iayed out in some detail why I think that there is a serious problem with the current proposals and how I think it can be solved. Slight modification to [0]: it occurred to me that the two different versions of syntactic sugar for asserted and unasserted occurrence terms, eg <<... >> and <<<... >>>, need to be mapped to two different primitives in gofo RDF: asserted occurrences need to be mapped to n-ary relations (qualifying the assertion), but unasserted occurrences (unlike what I propose in [0]) should be mapped to standard reification.
>
> Best,
> Thomas
>
>
> [0] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star-wg/2024Jul/0002.html
Received on Thursday, 4 July 2024 20:44:11 UTC