Re: RDF / RDFS semantics for the liberal baseline

> On 13. Jan 2025, at 17:30, Franconi Enrico <franconi@inf.unibz.it> wrote:
> 
> Let’s continue the discussion about the RDF / RDFS semantics for the liberal baseline.
> After the finalization of the liberal baseline simple semantics, it is necessarily the case that the RDF / RDFS semantics have to be at least as follows.
> RDF SEMANTICS
> 
> RDF interpretations add the following new IRI with the namespace prefix rdf: rdf:reifies. 
> 
> The rdfD2 RDF entailment pattern is replaced by the following entailment pattern, so to have a sound and complete set of metamodelling RDF entailment patterns: ⏪
> 
> if the triple structure appears in S then S RDF entails
> rdfD2-ts sss aaa ooo aaa rdf:type rdf:Property .
> RDFS SEMANTICS
> 
> The rdfs4a and rdfs4b RDFS entailment patterns are replaced by the following entailment patterns: 
> 
> if the triple structure appears in S then S RDFS entails
> rdfs4a-ts sss aaa ooo sss rdf:type rdfs:Resource .
> rdfs4b-ts sss aaa ooo ooo rdf:type rdfs:Resource .
> 
> 
> The question is what people want to do with rdfs:Proposition.
> Possibilities:

Caveat: the definition of rdf:Proposition is still outstanding, so the following answers can only be tentative. However, I expect that definition to not be very close to RDF  (e.g. not "it is an unasserted triple"), but rather quite philosophical (e.g. "it is something that can be either true or false") in which case it could also be represented by an IRI that refers to something that can be either true or false.

> 
> I want that triple terms are of type rdfs:Proposition.
> YES
> NO

YES
that seems to be the minimum, otherwise why even have the type

> I want that objects of rdf:reifies triples at top level are of type rdfs:Proposition.
> YES
> NO

YES
and if they are not triple terms then they are interpreted as truth values (e.g. if they are an IRI that addresses a webpage about Einsteins theory of relativity, then that IRI, as object of a rdf:reifies relation, is interpreted as either true or false, not as the theory, not as Einsteins work, not as a webpage, etc)

> I want that objects of rdf:reifies triples at any nested level are of type rdfs:Proposition.
> YES
> NO

YES
with the same caveat as before


.t

> 
> —e.
>