Re: RDF* vs RDF vs named graphs

Perer,

> What should be concluded from this?  Just about the most charitable conclusion
> is that RDF* is unsuitable for its claimed use.

the fact that the examples do not reflect the best way to address their use-cases using RDF* (as it is formally defined) does not mean that such a way does not exist.

Don't get me wrong: I am not trying to minimize the fact that such examples are, in a way, harmful. Clearly, they have created a lot of misunderstanding. One could even think that the popularity of RDF* happened for bad reasons, because people saw in those example something that was not here (in the formal definition, nor in the implementations).

What makes me more optimistic is, precisely, that we have implementations, some of them deployed in commercial products. I'll leave the implementers comment on that, but I'm curious to know how their customers are using RDF*, and whether the unicity of embedded triples raised that many problems.

Just a small comment below on one of the examples that you quote:

On 03/12/2020 00:47, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> I certainly agree with Thomas that examples used throughout the RDF* documents
> and discussions are ill-supported by the various formal definitions underlying
> RDF*.
>
> We see
>
> :bob foaf:name "Bob" .
> <<:bob foaf:age 23>>
>    dct:creator <http://example.com/crawlers#c1> ;
>    dct:source <http://example.net/listing.html> .
>
> in http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1912/paper12.pdf
>
> <<:painting :height 32.1>>
>    :unit :cm;
>    :measurementTechnique :laserScanning;
>    :measuredOn "2020-02-11"^^xsd:date.
>
> <<:man :hasSpouse :woman>>
>    :source :TheNationalEnquirer;
>    :webpage <http://nationalenquirer.com/news/2020-02-12>;
>    :retrieved "2020-02-13"^^xsd:dateTime.
>
> in https://graphdb.ontotext.com/documentation/9.2/free/devhub/rdf-sparql-star.html
>
> <<:Bess_Schrader :employedBy :Enterprise_Knowledge . >> :dateAdded "2020-05-22" .
> <<:Bess_Schrader :employedBy :Enterprise_Knowledge . >> :addedBy :user_bscrader .
>
> in https://enterprise-knowledge.com/rdf-what-is-it-and-why-do-i-need-it/

I can't help but notice that the embedded triple is repeated here, 
although the intention is clearly to put two annotations on the same arc 
-- the illustrating figure leaves no doubt about that:

https://enterprise-knowledge.com/cms/assets/uploads/2020/07/rdf_7.jpeg

so that person does not seem to assume that multiple embedded triples 
represent different arcs...

     best

>
> <<?c a rdfs:Class>> dct:source ?src ;
>      prov:wasDerivedFrom <<?c a owl:Class>> .
>
> :loisLane :believes << :superman :can :fly >>.
>
> in https://w3c.github.io/rdf-star/rdf-star-cg-spec.html
>
>
>
> What should be concluded from this?  Just about the most charitable conclusion
> is that RDF* is unsuitable for its claimed use.
>
> So what is RDF* good for?  I am concerned about this.
>
>
> peter
>
>
>
>