W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-star@w3.org > May 2021

Re: drop referentially opaque semantics in embedded triples

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 7 May 2021 11:14:00 -0400
To: thomas lörtsch <tl@rat.io>, public-rdf-star@w3.org
Message-ID: <5aac1b4a-a23d-1726-0be6-9ced81d4512d@gmail.com>
Please ignore this message.  I made a serious error in where opacity occurs in 
"PG mode".   I'll try to rework it shortly.

peter


On 5/7/21 8:52 AM, Peter Patel-Schneider wrote:
> An excellent description of the problems with referential opacity in
> embedded triples.   I agree wholeheartedly.  I particularly like the
> detailed investigation into the use cases.
>
>
> I also note that referential opacity works poorly for the annotation
> syntax (PG mode).  With referential opacity
>
> :elizabeth :spouse :richard {| :count 2 |} .
>
> does not entail
>
> :elizabeth :spouse :richard {| :count 02 |} .
>
> which I take to be completely unexpected.
>
> (I purposefully picked an example that did not need any external
> identity relationship.)
>
>
> With this observation I would put use cases 3.1, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6,
> 3,8, 3.9, 3.13, and 3.15 decidedly in the referential transparency
> camp.
>
>
> peter
>
>
> PS:  On a technical note, with the new semantics switching between
> various versions of transparent and opaque is simply a matter of
> changing the triples added when eliminating an embedded triple
> (described in Section 6.1).
>
> PPS: On a further technical note, with the new semantics it is possible
> to have transparent semantics for some embedded triples and opaque
> semantics for other embedded triples - all that is needed is variations
> on the syntax that result in different generated triples.  Whether this
> is a good idea is a different matter.
>
>
>
>
Received on Friday, 7 May 2021 15:14:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 7 May 2021 15:14:15 UTC