- From: Miel Vander Sande <miel.vandersande@meemoo.be>
- Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2021 21:15:27 +0100
- To: thomas lörtsch <tl@rat.io>
- Cc: Olaf Hartig <olaf.hartig@liu.se>, public-rdf-star@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CAHeRLWutUmp5HMzERkBddPDtXnaL4dhoGa_bb4TN3R0t16-0Lg@mail.gmail.com>
The N3 semantics are still being defined, but I already advocated that N3 should be a superset of whatever RDFstar turns out to be: https://github.com/w3c/N3/issues/27 Anything else would limit its practical use IMO On Thu, 18 Feb 2021, 20:30 thomas lörtsch, <tl@rat.io> wrote: > > > > On 18. Feb 2021, at 15:56, Olaf Hartig <olaf.hartig@liu.se> wrote: > > > > Hi Antoine, > > > > On torsdag 18 februari 2021 kl. 15:02:11 CET Antoine Zimmermann wrote: > >> The RDF-star syntax allows for arbitrary nesting of triples like so: > >> > >> << :s :p << << :a :b :c >> :y :z >> a :nesting . > >> > >> Why is it so, why is it useful/needed? > >> There are no examples of nested triples. There are no justifications in > >> the spec for allowing this. As far as I know, there are no examples in > >> the past documents that defined RDF*. I did not see any use cases > >> discussed for them. > > > > How's about something like the following? > > > > :charlie :claims << :alice :claims <<:bob :age 23>> >> . > > > > > >> However, I have seen discussions that may serve as counter arguments: > >> when asked why embedded triples are limited to single triples rather > >> than sets of triples, it has been answered that RDF* is used to model > >> property-graph-like annotations that only concern one edge at a time. In > >> this case, nested triples should not be allowed, using the same > >> arguments (as far as I know, it is not possible to nest edge-annotations > >> in property graph systems). > >> > >> Nesting makes parsers more complicated, makes it more difficult to > >> define the semantics of the data model as well as of the query language. > >> > >> If some use cases justify nested triples, then why not use cases justify > >> embedded sets of triples? > > > > I still think that a statement about a particular triple is something > else > > than a statement about a set of triples (a.k.a. an RDF graph) that > happens to > > contain a single triple. > > > > For use cases in which you want to have sets of triples in the subject > > position or the object position of another triple, doesn't N3 allow you > to do > > this? > > Is RDF* just a subset of N3? > > Thomas > > >> Also, a question to implementers: do you support nested embedded > triples? > > > > I know that Jena supports it. > > > > Best, > > Olaf > > > > > > >
Received on Thursday, 18 February 2021 20:15:52 UTC