Re: RDF-star use cases from Amazon Neptune

On Dec 6, 2021, at 11:54 AM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com> wrote:
> What I mean is that SPARQL* has the same status (part of the WG docment) as RDF*.   That would have been a much better way of saying it.

Even better would be taking and making note of the fact that both SPARQL* 
and RDF* have been deprecated for many months, now.

Continuing to use these labels, no matter the validity of the commentary
whether applied to RDF* or RDF-star, will continue to foster confusion 
about what RDF-star and SPARQL-star offer (and, indeed, what they do not).

Also note, there is no WG (Working Group) document as yet.  There is a 
draft charter for a prospective WG, and there are some (still draft) 
reports from a sub-group of the RDF-DEV Community Group.  Referring to
these as if they have a status they do not will also continue more to 
foster confusion than to bring understanding.

Be seeing you,

Ted




--
A: Yes.                          http://www.idallen.com/topposting.html
| Q: Are you sure?           
| | A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
| | | Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?

Ted Thibodeau, Jr.           //               voice +1-781-273-0900 x32
Senior Support & Evangelism  //        mailto:tthibodeau@openlinksw.com
                             //              http://twitter.com/TallTed
OpenLink Software, Inc.      //              http://www.openlinksw.com/
         20 Burlington Mall Road, Suite 322, Burlington MA 01803
     Weblog    -- http://www.openlinksw.com/blogs/
     Community -- https://community.openlinksw.com/
     LinkedIn  -- http://www.linkedin.com/company/openlink-software/
     Twitter   -- http://twitter.com/OpenLink
     Facebook  -- http://www.facebook.com/OpenLinkSoftware
Universal Data Access, Integration, and Management Technology Providers