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

"embedded predicate triples"

From: james anderson <james@dydra.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2020 11:12:32 +0000
Message-ID: <0102017618daa951-c23ef95e-edd4-43c4-bf8c-7a91182f47f9-000000@eu-west-1.amazonses.com>
To: "public-rdf-star@w3.org" <public-rdf-star@w3.org>
the 27.11 discussion included a question about whether to permit “embedded triples” in the predicate role and why.

    jerven: Question: why we don't have embedded triples in the property position? 
    ... we need to put in down somewhere in the proposal
    Olaf: why would it be used for?
    Is that use case somewhere in the use case list?
    …
    <pfps_> Indeed, if the meaning of RDF* is defined as just a vocabulary extension to RDF, and embedded triples are IRIs, then embedded triples should be allowed in predicate position in surface syntaxes. However, it looks as if embedded triples have to be blank nodes in this definition of RDF*, so they can't be in predicate position.
    pchampin: We should stick for now with the restrictions
    james_: Embedded quad is actually in one of the use case. I react on the the point of using embedded triples in the predicate 
    ... Describing a use case.
    <pfps_> I don't see how embedded triples as predicates advances similarity to property graphs. I would need an example of a property graph to see how this might work.
    Could james_ add that use case somewhere?
    <Olaf> I don't understand

this is not a new topic.
the mechanism was described at length by nguyen along with an extended use case in [1] and rejected for rdf* by hartig in [2].
---
[1] https://mor2.nlm.nih.gov/pubs/pdf/2014-www-vn.pdf
[2] http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1912/paper12.pdf
---
james anderson | james@dydra.com | http://dydra.com
Received on Monday, 30 November 2020 11:12:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 30 November 2020 11:12:47 UTC