unasserted triple terms - how does the semantics achieve that?

Hi all,

I tried to sketch a semantics for _asserted triple terms, but I found that I don’t understand how the currently discussed "baseline" and (the even more baseline) "transparent" profiles define that triple terms are _un_asserted.


Take the very minimalistic "transparent" profile [0]:

The abstract syntax defines recursively that a tripleTerm is composed of a triple, a triple of subject, predicate and object, etc. There is no notion that a triple inside triple term is handled in any special way.

The semantics defines an interpretation structure I, including under point 6 "an injective function RE from IR x IP x IR into IR, called the denotation of triple terms". So triple terms are interpreted as resources that can be referred to by a reifier. I guess so far I understand. 
Also, and I take this from the "baseline" profile [1], which distinguishes referentially transparent from opaque triple terms, IS is applied, i.e. IRIs are interpreted (and the same is presumably true for IL).
But how then is IEXT _not_ applied (applying which in my understanding would result in those triples being added to the extension of IP, a precondition to making them true via what follows)?

The semantics then defines a function [I+A](.) to interpret I. The function 
    [I+A](r) = RE([I+A](r.s), [I+A](r.p), [I+A](r.o)) if r is a tripleTerm
defines the interpretation of triple terms. 
However, how does that exclude the application of [I+A](.) on the constituents of r, namely r.s, r.p and r.o (and most specifically r.p)?


Can someone please try to explain to me what I’m missing, and maybe give a hint on how a semantics for _asserted_ triple terms would have to deviate?

Best,
Thomas


[0] https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/wiki/RDF-star-profile-%22transparent%22
[1] https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/wiki/RDF-star-%22baseline%22

Received on Sunday, 9 June 2024 16:19:14 UTC