- From: Franconi Enrico <franconi@inf.unibz.it>
- Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2025 12:30:32 +0000
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
- CC: "public-rdf-star-wg@w3.org" <public-rdf-star-wg@w3.org>
On 9 Jan 2025, at 12:51, Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com> wrote: > I am against this super-range treatement of rdfs:reifies. That is, just because rdf:reifies shows up in a triple term is no reason to make the object of the triple term be a proposition. The rationale here is that triple terms are not asserted so there is no reason for them to have consequences. My position would be to deal with rdf:reifies just like rdf:type. So, I would agree that there shouldn’t be a “super-range” treatement of rdfs:reifies (wrt rdfs:Proposition). just like we don’t have it for rdf:type (wrt rdfs:Class). Or maybe we could have super-range fro both. —e.
Received on Thursday, 9 January 2025 12:30:39 UTC