Re: RDF / RDFS semantics for the liberal baseline

By considering all the responses so far, there is an overwhelming majority in favor of:

  1.  I want that triple terms are of type rdfs:Proposition.
     *   YES
  2.  I want that objects of rdf:reifies triples at top level are of type rdfs:Proposition.
     *   YES
  3.  I want that objects of rdf:reifies triples at any nested level are of type rdfs:Proposition.
     *   NO

So, the current version of the liberal baseline in the wiki<https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/wiki/RDF-star-%22liberal-baseline%22> reflects that.
—e.

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:


  1.  I want that triple terms are of type rdfs:Proposition.
     *   YES
     *   NO
  2.  I want that objects of rdf:reifies triples at top level are of type rdfs:Proposition.
     *   YES
     *   NO
  3.  I want that objects of rdf:reifies triples at any nested level are of type rdfs:Proposition.
     *   YES
     *   NO

—e.