Re: Annotation syntax

Hi Andy,

Thanks for the response.

It seems I need to relearn the semantics of the RDF/SPARQL-star syntax from the earlier WG.

Are any constraints applied to where the <<( :s :p :o )>> triple concept terms may be used.
Is that only in the “object” position like literals, or also as a “subject” like IRIs and blank nodes?
Or even as a predicate?

Given generalized RDF triples, graphs, and datasets [G-RDF].
Is there anything to be said to only allow triple concept terms as an object in non-generalized RDF?

Further still, why not just use RDF literals for triple concepts and introduce a new datatype (cf. rdf:HTML, rdf:XMLLiteral, and rdf:JSON)?

Apologies if I retread old ground, it’s hard to keep track of what has and has not been discussed based on the mailing list.

[G-RDF] https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf12-concepts/#section-generalized-rdf


Regards,

John Walker
Business Analyst
NXP Semiconductors
High Tech Campus (HTC)60 - 4.34d, 5656 AG Eindhoven, The Netherlands
E-mail/Skype: john.walker@nxp.com<mailto:john.walker@nxp.com>
Web: www.NXP.com<http://www.NXP.com>

The information contained in this message is confidential and may be legally privileged. The message is intended solely for the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, or reproduction is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by return e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.