Can I assume that blank node is not replaceable by a IRI?

I want to have a structure like this (in Turtle): rdfs:seeAlso
  (<> <>) .

But sometimes I want my seeAlso to be conditional, so I could specify
that some of the seeAlso resources are used only in "transformation"
mode or only in "validation" mode, like this: rdfs:seeAlso (
  [ :iri <> ; :transformation: false ]
  [ :iri <> ; :validation: false ]
) .

However in this case I use a blank node instead of a IRI.

My question: Is it OK (or a heresy) to do different thing for a blank
node rather than for an explicit IRI?

Isn't there the invariant that if blank nodes are replaced with unique
IRIs then the meaning should not change? (And the above does NOT
conform to this invariant.)

If to conform to this variant, the first example would become instead: rdfs:seeAlso
  ([ :iri <> ] [
:iri <> ]) .

what seems not concise enough.

What to do?

Received on Saturday, 23 December 2017 16:09:51 UTC