Re: Decision from the Semantics TF: liberal baseline

At the last Semantics TF we discussed about the RDF semantics of the liberal baseline.
In the current version of the document:
https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/wiki/RDF-star-%22liberal-baseline%22#rdf-semantics

the two discussed restrictions

Shouldn’t we rather stop calling them restrictions? They define things, but they can’t enforce anything.

E.g., the second proposal says that objects of rdf:reifies should have type rdf:proposition. It is true that, if an object resource does not have that type stated, we don't assume it does not have the type (negation as failure, which is contradicted by the open-world assumption); rather, we assume that the resource has that type, by inferring that type for it. But, it is still a restriction IMO - objects need to have type rdf:proposition - even though it is not being "enforced" as in throwing an error or something.

It is a restriction in a semantics sense: they restrict the models of a RDF graph by allowing only the models where:

  *   triple terms, appearing in triples or in triple terms, are of type rdf:proposition;
  *   objects of the property rdf:reifies, appearing in triples or in triple terms, are of type rdf:proposition.

—e.