assertions on facts

In the meeting yesterday there was discussion on whether RDF 1.2 currently 
supports assertions on facts (asserted triples).  My claim is that it does, 
and in a way that needs no change to Semantics.

During the meeting there was some discussion about some text that I authored. 
I believe that the text is
https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/pull/220#issuecomment-3113421890

That text, in essence, says that Semantics provides the basic machinery to 
talk about assertions on facts because it defines facts in an interpretation. 
This is then used to define facts asserted by a graph.  That's all the 
semantic machinery that is needed to support assertions on facts.


The remaining part is to call on the intended meaning of rdf:reifies and say 
(not in Semantics) that an assertion about a fact in a graph is a triple whose 
subject is a reifier of a triple where the object of the reification triple is 
(denotes) a fact in the graph.  So ex:r ex:source ex:NYT is an assertion about 
the fact ex:John ex:loves ex:Mary in

ex:r rdf:reifies <<( ex:John ex:loves ex:Mary )>> .
ex:John ex:loves ex:Mary .

This remaining part is not suitable for Semantics, in my opinion, as it does 
not provide any semantic machinery but is instead about the intented meaning 
of rdf:reifies and how rdf:reifies is supposed to be used.  As far as 
Semantics is concerned, any property could be used.  This is a decided 
positive, as it allows any property to be used in a similar way, perhaps with 
a stronger intended meaning or perhaps with a weaker intended meaning.

peter

Received on Friday, 22 August 2025 15:35:18 UTC