Are the names RDF* and SPARQL* worth the confusion?

On 10/27/20 3:01 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> [Back to the original topic of this thread.]
>
>
> I was looking at the semantics of RDF* and I think I have discovered further
> weakness of embedded triples.  In the semantics for RDF* there is a special
> mechanism to allow:
>
> Mary believes << John loves _:a >>
>
> to RDF*-entail
>
> Mary believes << John loves _:b >>
>
>
> But this mechanism is very weak.  As far as I can tell
>
> Mary believes << John loves _:a >>
>
> does not RDF*-entail
>
> Mary believes << John loves _:c >>
>
> Mary believes << John loves _:b >>
>
>
> nor does
>
>
> Mary believes << John loves Susan >>
>
> RDF*-entail
>
> Mary believes << John loves _:a >>
>
>
> Both of these non-entailments seem to me to be significant problems with RDF*.
>
>
> peter
>
>
>
Everyone,

Why is this endeavor named RDF* when it isn't RDF?

Is it worth the confusion++ ?

-- 
Regards,

Kingsley Idehen       
Founder & CEO 
OpenLink Software   
Home Page: http://www.openlinksw.com
Community Support: https://community.openlinksw.com
Weblogs (Blogs):
Company Blog: https://medium.com/openlink-software-blog
Virtuoso Blog: https://medium.com/virtuoso-blog
Data Access Drivers Blog: https://medium.com/openlink-odbc-jdbc-ado-net-data-access-drivers

Personal Weblogs (Blogs):
Medium Blog: https://medium.com/@kidehen
Legacy Blogs: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen/
              http://kidehen.blogspot.com

Profile Pages:
Pinterest: https://www.pinterest.com/kidehen/
Quora: https://www.quora.com/profile/Kingsley-Uyi-Idehen
Twitter: https://twitter.com/kidehen
Google+: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen

Web Identities (WebID):
Personal: http://kingsley.idehen.net/public_home/kidehen/profile.ttl#i
        : http://id.myopenlink.net/DAV/home/KingsleyUyiIdehen/Public/kingsley.ttl#this