W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-star@w3.org > November 2020

Re: RDF* vs RDF vs named graphs

From: Patrick J Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 18:42:18 -0600
CC: "public-rdf-star@w3.org" <public-rdf-star@w3.org>
Message-ID: <1443D5D1-8545-4796-A08A-7229C5B9BDA2@ihmc.us>
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
I agree. When I first met the idea of RDF* I made this same point to Thomas, and we had some correspondence on the topic. I came to the conclusion that my expending effort towards the development of RDF* would be a waste of time. 

Pat

> On Nov 29, 2020, at 4:43 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I've been thinking about the expressive power of RDF* related to the
> expressive power of RDF, at least the versions of RDF* that have been proposed
> so far.
> 
> As far as I can tell anything that can be done in RDF* can be easily done in
> RDF by using standard
> RDF reification techniques, perhaps slightly modified (e.g., to account for
> malformed literals), with extra properties linking to syntactic encodings to
> achieve referential opacity.
> 
> But named graphs are more expressive than RDF* in a certain sense, as named
> graphs allow multiple "embedded" triples to be collected together.
> 
> 
> 
> peter
> 
> 
> 
Received on Monday, 30 November 2020 00:42:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 30 November 2020 00:42:37 UTC