Re: RDF*/SPARQL* syntax

+1 to being more clear in discussions about the dialect/mode of RDF* discussed

+ is there a reason why the abstarct RDF* syntax with () braces is also part of this discussion? I’m mainly interested in the look and feel of RDF* in RDF. Consequently I’d like all examples to be in Turtle style if there is no good reason to resort to abstract syntax for e.g. comparison purposes.

+ I’d like to see an example of some size (like maybe 10 to 20 lines) that shows the central design attributes of RDF* and clarifies what it is and what it’s not.
E.g. some people (including me) initially were under the impression that RDF* could represent sets of triples on the top level (like named graphs). That may indicate a sloppy reading of the RDF* papers but still: an example of some size should and easily could clarify such misconceptions.
Such an example should also help us to show and comprehend the consequences of e.g. asymmetry of RDF* nodes in RDF, PG vs. SA mode etc.

Thanks,
Thomas


> On 4. Sep 2019, at 02:11, Ted Thibodeau Jr <tthibodeau@openlinksw.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> On Sep 3, 2019, at 04:13 PM, Olaf Hartig <olaf.hartig@liu.se> wrote:
>> 
>> However, the aspect of RDF* that you mention exists only when using RDF*/SPARQL* in PG mode. It is not clear yet whether we end up with proposing only PG mode, or only SA mode, or maybe both as alternative options.
> 
> 
> Setting all else aside, I cannot be the only person whose eyes
> and mind are glazing over a bit trying to keep track of RDF* vs
> RDF*/PG vs RDF*/SA vs RDF.
> 
> RDF is an acronym, from "Resource Description Framework".
> 
> RDF* is ... an acronym plus a splat?  "Resource Description
> Framework Star"?
> 
> And how are we to read the Modes -- "RDF-star Property Graph Mode"
> and "RDF-star separate-assertions mode", or PG-Mode (which puts me
> in mind of the USA's motion picture rating system)?  As I'm reading
> this thread, these appear to be mutually incompatible -- but there's
> no obvious signal as to which mode is active on any given TURTLE*
> file (and what will that file's extension be?  Clearly, `TTL*`
> won't work, as it's both 4 characters, and includes a special.)
> 
> SPARQL* and TURTLE* hit me similarly.
> 
> Some will dismissively say this is just bikeshedding, but good
> naming matters, especially when things that *look* very similar
> must be interpreted very differently -- such as TURTLE* vs TURTLE.
> 
> Even in this thread, RDF*/SA interpretations have been applied (by
> the only person who could really be familiar with them) to data
> which was meant (to the degree that the rest of us can do so) to
> be read as RDF*/PG (since that's the only significantly publicly
> presented mode to date).
> 
> This sort of ambiguity leads to misinterpretation, misunderstanding,
> lowered uptake, heightened confusion, and I fear, to an increased
> derogation of any Semantic Web.
> 
> Just some further thoughts, as I try to keep up with this list.
> 
> Ted
> 
> 
> 
> --
> A: Yes.                          http://www.idallen.com/topposting.html
> | Q: Are you sure?
> | | A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
> | | | Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?
> 
> Ted Thibodeau, Jr.           //               voice +1-781-273-0900 x32
> Senior Support & Evangelism  //        mailto:tthibodeau@openlinksw.com
>                             //              http://twitter.com/TallTed
> OpenLink Software, Inc.      //              http://www.openlinksw.com/
>         20 Burlington Mall Road, Suite 322, Burlington MA 01803
>     Weblog    -- http://www.openlinksw.com/blogs/
>     Community -- https://community.openlinksw.com/
>     LinkedIn  -- http://www.linkedin.com/company/openlink-software/
>     Twitter   -- http://twitter.com/OpenLink
>     Facebook  -- http://www.facebook.com/OpenLinkSoftware
> Universal Data Access, Integration, and Management Technology Providers
> 
> 
> 
>