Re: owl:sameAs/referential opacity Re: Can RDFstar be defined as only syntactic sugar on top of RDF (Re: weakness of embedded triples) from Holger Knublauch on 2020-10-29 (public-rdf-star@w3.org from October 2020)

From: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2020 09:54:04 +1000
To: public-rdf-star@w3.org
Message-ID: <8accf538-dfed-4726-778d-ba20113f06af@topquadrant.com>

On 10/30/2020 8:25 AM, thomas lörtsch wrote:
> But introducing a new node type to me feels like a much graver 
> intervention into the RDF semantics than defining a mapping from 
> statements to IRIs. 

Yes exactly. We are all thinking out loud here and the outcome is likely 
going to be some glued-on patch that isn't going to be perfect from a 
theoretical POV. But the fact that RDF is already widely used and 
implemented is an opportunity, not a problem. Therefore, I think the 
minor issue with the potential leakage when triple IRIs with blank nodes 
get written to Turtle is perfectly acceptable and pragmatic. A simple 
solution would be that the applications throw an error or a warning if 
they encounter such triples, so going from TTL* to TTL will simply not 
happen in practice.

Holger

Received on Thursday, 29 October 2020 23:54:21 UTC