Am not really close to this discussion, but still, I tried to implement things in N3 and it appears to me that: {:a :b :c} :p :o. could be SA mode and that <<:a :b :c>> :p :o. could be PG mode Jos -- https://josd.github.io/ <http://josd.github.io/> On Sat, Sep 5, 2020 at 11:39 AM Ghislain Atemezing < ghislain.atemezing@icloud.com> wrote: > Hello, > > Le 4 sept. 2020 à 00:30, Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com> a > écrit : > > Thinking this just a little bit further, there is a potential for better > names for these dialects. > > If RDF* in the most general sense is SA mode then the PG mode could be, > for example, called RDF+ aka RDF plus. It would be a bit like OWL Full vs > OWL DL, or SHACL-SPARQL vs SHACL Core. Some tools will elect to support PG > mode/RDF+ only. > > > +1. I like this analogy. Probably RDF+ can confused some of us using RDFS+ > (as a profile to do reasoning). > What about saying RDF* when you support both SA and PG (like OWL Full), > then RDF*-XX (XX = SA or PG) if someone supports just one of them? > > > Best, > Ghislain > ----------------------------------- > Ghislain Atemezing > http://atemezing.org >Received on Saturday, 5 September 2020 16:20:05 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 5 September 2020 16:20:06 UTC