00:11:51 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
01:00:46 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
01:11:25 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
01:12:16 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
02:26:19 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
02:52:54 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
03:13:59 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
03:32:07 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
04:02:11 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
04:29:46 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
04:48:44 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
08:02:05 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
08:11:27 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
08:24:17 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
08:42:16 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
09:03:15 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
09:27:33 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
09:45:54 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
10:05:11 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
10:24:18 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
10:43:47 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
11:01:59 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
11:35:09 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
11:55:11 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
12:13:57 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
12:33:51 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
12:51:57 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
13:15:50 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
13:35:28 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
13:54:37 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
14:30:29 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
14:52:24 <AndyS> AndyS has joined #rdf-star
14:59:19 <tl> tl has joined #rdf-star
14:59:19 <enrico> enrico has joined #rdf-star
14:59:22 <enrico> present+
14:59:34 <tl> present+
15:00:26 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
15:00:58 <ora> ora has joined #rdf-star
15:01:15 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
15:07:32 <pchampin> present+
15:08:06 <gkellogg> zakim, who's here?
15:08:12 <gkellogg> present+
15:10:46 <ora> present+
15:11:13 <niklasl> niklasl has joined #rdf-star
15:11:22 <niklasl> present+
15:12:04 <AndyS> present+
15:12:56 <AndyS> scribe+
15:13:22 <AndyS> ora: To be named: triple term, triple occurrence, rdf:nameOf
15:13:51 <AndyS> gregg: and description of "triple occurrence" vs "triple term"
15:14:19 <AndyS> q+
15:14:40 <enrico> q+
15:14:42 <ora> ack AndyS
15:14:56 <niklasl> q+
15:15:09 <ora> ack enrico
15:15:09 <tl> RDF spec uses "instance" and "token" to refer to reifications
15:15:32 <AndyS> enrico: "triple term" is just a "triple"
15:15:38 <pchampin> q+
15:15:42 <gkellogg> q+
15:15:51 <ora> ack niklasl
15:16:08 <AndyS> AndyS: occurrence -> usage of a triple
15:16:19 <AndyS> niklas: rdf:Triple
15:16:38 <AndyS> ... need to look at use case to see if it fits and is neutral enough
15:17:16 <pchampin> "triple proxy"?
15:18:12 <AndyS> ... I am unclear about same bnode/uri as graph name and as a triple occurrence
15:18:18 <pchampin> << :e | :s1 :p1 :o1 >>. << :e | :s2 :p2 :o2 >>.
15:18:44 <AndyS> s/as graph name/for two triples/
15:18:55 <ora> ack pchampin
15:19:05 <olaf> olaf has joined #rdf-star
15:19:08 <AndyS> zakim, this is rdf-star
15:19:08 <Zakim> got it, AndyS
15:19:24 <AndyS> pchampin: I like "triple term"
15:19:44 <doerthe> doerthe has joined #rdf-star
15:19:48 <olaf> present+
15:19:54 <AndyS> ... they are different role to triple as elements of a graph
15:20:03 <olaf> q?
15:20:05 <ora> ack gkellogg
15:20:17 <AndyS> ... need a name that recognizes that role are differents
15:20:31 <olaf> q+
15:20:44 <AndyS> gregg: "triple" is a production in concrete syntaxes. Need a different name.
15:20:54 <ora> ack olaf
15:20:57 <pchampin> q+
15:21:15 <AndyS> olaf: Support for "triple term" over "triple descriptor"
15:21:21 <tl> q+
15:21:43 <AndyS> ... recognize the two roles/concepts
15:21:54 <ora> ack pchampin
15:22:22 <AndyS> pchampin: +1 to gregg about need a type for this. rdf:Triple - not "triple term"
15:22:37 <AndyS> ... (type as in rdf:Class)
15:22:38 <niklasl> +1, the construct (the 3-tuple) is a triple term; I also agree that the type can be rdf:Triple
15:23:17 <AndyS> ... which is why "name" in "nameOf" is a weak choice for me
15:23:35 <AndyS> gregg: "mention" used before
15:23:44 <enrico> q+
15:23:56 <ora> ack tl
15:23:56 <niklasl> +100 to "the thing is not a name" (see also "Haddock's Eyes" in Through the Looking Glass :P )
15:24:04 <AndyS> ora: "stands for" ? Appeal to intuition of user
15:24:29 <AndyS> tl: have triple type terms and triple occurrence terms
15:24:44 <AndyS> gregg: those are not RDF terms
15:24:57 <AndyS> tl: We need consistent naming
15:25:25 <AndyS> ... :nameOf -> :instanceOf or possibly :occurrenceOf
15:25:31 <niklasl> q+
15:25:33 <ora> ack enrico
15:25:39 <gkellogg> q+
15:26:10 <AndyS> enrico: name of the triple occurence and the predicate could be the same (similar)
15:26:25 <AndyS> s/occurence/occurrence/
15:26:40 <ora> ack niklasl
15:26:40 <AndyS> ... can have several names
15:27:09 <Souri> Souri has joined #rdf-star
15:27:13 <AndyS> niklas: easier to look at use cases e.g. marriages have start, end relations
15:27:28 <Souri> present+
15:27:33 <AndyS> ... naming the relation from (asserted) triple and the annotation
15:27:59 <AndyS> ... most neutral would be rdf:triple predicate
15:28:07 <AndyS> ... of rdf:useOf maybe
15:28:15 <pchampin> rdf:triple rdfs:range rdf:Triple . make sense :)
15:28:18 <AndyS> s/of rdf:/or rdf:/
15:29:30 <AndyS> ... some use case would be better with specific vocabulary e..g "description"
15:30:16 <AndyS> ... with semantic restrictions for the UC
15:30:40 <ora> q+
15:31:04 <AndyS> ... several options
15:31:22 <ora> ack gkellogg
15:31:51 <tl> q+
15:32:06 <AndyS> gkellog: advocate "mention" - describes the "mention" = use of the triple in the graph
15:32:21 <pchampin> is the *2nd mariage* of Richard and Liz a "mention" of a triple?
15:32:37 <enrico> q+
15:32:42 <AndyS> ... cardinality of one - entailment may affect this
15:32:49 <ora> ack ora
15:32:55 <niklasl> Its more of a qualification of. Or a reificiation... :P
15:33:29 <ora> ack tl
15:33:29 <AndyS> ora: should be be connected to name choice for triple occurrence choice
15:33:35 <AndyS> tl: +1 to Ora
15:33:56 <pchampin> q+
15:34:01 <AndyS> ... the property should be abstract ("general"/ed)
15:34:43 <ora> ack enrico
15:35:13 <gkellogg> q+
15:36:01 <AndyS> enrico: reviewed philosophy books ... triple referent , triple occurrence are the truth maker.
15:36:20 <AndyS> ora: "referent" has RDF history via PICS.
15:36:46 <ora> ack pchampin
15:36:53 <AndyS> enrico: "the wedding of L and R" -- statement : w1 is the referent of this statement
15:37:13 <AndyS> pchampin: often used to distinguish syntax and semantics
15:37:34 <AndyS> ... between domain of language (symbols) and domain of discourse
15:37:40 <enrico> q+
15:37:48 <AndyS> ... this might create wrong expections
15:38:07 <AndyS> ... like rdf:Triple  giving rdf:hasTriple
15:38:36 <AndyS> ... too neutral is better
15:39:08 <AndyS> ... RHS is a triple
15:39:44 <AndyS> ... unclear whether should encourage multiple names but would work is rdf:hasTriple (not "the name")
15:40:00 <tl> q?
15:40:02 <ora> ack gkellogg
15:40:03 <niklasl> +1 no domain (domain is just rdfs:Resource)
15:40:18 <AndyS> ... very general then name for domain makes less sense
15:40:43 <AndyS> gkellogg: "occurrence" implies it is really in the graph
15:41:05 <AndyS> ... but we want use for a thing not in the graph e.g. to deny it.
15:41:05 <ora> ack enrico
15:41:10 <Souri> +1 to avoiding "occurrence"
15:41:27 <niklasl> q+
15:41:33 <ora> ack niklasl
15:41:49 <AndyS> niklasl: examples ...
15:42:00 <niklasl> _:x a :Claim ; :source <some-news-article> ; rdfx:theTripleRelation <<( <elizabethtaylor> sdo:spouse <richardburton> )>> .
15:42:22 <tl> q+
15:42:40 <niklasl> _:y a :Marriage ; rdfx:theTripleRelation <<( <elizabethtaylor> a :Wife )>> , <<( <richardburton> a :Husband )>> , <<( <elizabethtaylor> sdo:spouse <richardburton> )>> .
15:42:41 <AndyS> ... "has triple" work, "referent" works
15:43:24 <ora> ack tl
15:43:43 <AndyS> tl: asserted vs not asserted seems to make a difference
15:44:01 <AndyS> ... "claim of" OK, "fact of " not OK
15:44:26 <ora> q+
15:44:37 <AndyS> q+
15:44:42 <ora> ack ora
15:44:42 <niklasl> <thisgraph> { _:x a :Fact ; :assertedIn <thisgraph> {| :comment "obviously" |} ; rdfx:theTripleRelation <<( <elizabethtaylor> sdo:spouse <richardburton> )>> . }
15:45:00 <pchampin> << :e | :s :p :o >> a :Fact .  # or :Claim
15:45:02 <AndyS> ora: unasserted now may become asserted
15:45:35 <ora> ack AndyS
15:45:36 <niklasl> <thisgraph> { <elizabethtaylor> sdo:spouse <richardburton> . }
15:45:41 <enrico> q+
15:45:46 <AndyS> tl: maybe even be the author considers it asserted wven if not mentioned
15:45:47 <pchampin> { ?x a :Fact; ?x rdf:tripple ?t } => { ?x :factOf ?t }.
15:45:49 <pchampin> q+
15:46:16 <ora> ack enrico
15:46:36 <niklasl> +1 to Andy, we're looking for one choice of name
15:46:42 <AndyS> andys: annotation is used for asserted+rest
15:47:23 <AndyS> enrico: (examples in zoom chat for formatting)
15:48:04 <AndyS> ... we "refer" to the specific statement, event, triple
15:48:09 <AndyS> q?
15:48:18 <AndyS> ora: makes sense
15:48:18 <ora> ack pchampin
15:48:54 <AndyS> pchampin: to TL: specific property : at x:45 in IRC
15:49:06 <AndyS> ... model in N3
15:49:10 <AndyS> ... OWL?
15:49:39 <AndyS> ... we can type them to give the subproperty they relate to
15:50:04 <AndyS> ... (discussion of subproperty)
15:50:53 <enrico> q+
15:51:15 <AndyS> ... to enrico - nice example - predicate "refersTo" can be modelled as ":w2 rdf:type :Situation" then general property
15:51:21 <tl> q+
15:51:30 <ora> ack enrico
15:51:44 <AndyS> enrico: less than "type"
15:52:23 <Souri> rdf:tripleForm may be?
15:52:52 <gkellogg> q+
15:52:56 <Souri> q+
15:53:19 <ora> ack tl
15:53:19 <AndyS> pchampin: prefer rdf:triple for the property as neutral + name agreement => RHS is a rdf:Triple. Hard to restrict LHS.
15:53:47 <AndyS> tl: we never what an URI refers to.
15:54:32 <ora> ack gkellogg
15:54:34 <AndyS> s/never what/never known what/
15:55:05 <ora> ack Souri
15:55:06 <AndyS> gkellogg: warn against against names differing only by case.
15:55:06 <pchampin> good point
15:55:29 <AndyS> souri: the connection should be neutral
15:55:29 <TallTed> TallTed has joined #rdf-star
15:55:47 <AndyS> ... maybe "e has form s p o"
15:56:14 <niklasl> q+
15:56:18 <AndyS> ... "e has triple form s p o"
15:56:19 <ora> ack niklasl
15:56:27 <pchampin> do mariages have the form of a triple?? :->
15:56:52 <AndyS> niklasl:  like "rdf:value" - not sure about that
15:57:19 <AndyS> ... support "hasTriple"
15:57:41 <AndyS> ... what about lists as terms in the future
15:58:08 <pchampin> tl, about the referent of IRIs: https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/#h3_referents covers it, IMO
15:58:44 <AndyS> enrico: in the discussion we didn't consider reification => "reifies"
15:58:45 <ora> STRAWPOLL: "hasTriple" or something else?
15:58:53 <ora> hasTriple
15:58:59 <pchampin> +1
15:59:02 <gkellogg> +0.7
15:59:03 <niklasl> +0.75
15:59:05 <enrico> + why not?
15:59:08 <tl> something else
15:59:11 <pfps> pfps has joined #rdf-star
15:59:12 <doerthe> +0
15:59:14 <olaf> +0
15:59:18 <AndyS> +1 - several suggtions so far are OK
15:59:23 <pfps> +0
15:59:28 <Souri> +1 to rdf:hasTriple (or rdf:hasTripleForm)
15:59:34 <Souri> q+
15:59:42 <ora> ack Souri
15:59:52 <AndyS> ora: working choice "rdf:hasTriple"
16:00:23 <AndyS> souri: same e have s1 p1 o1 and also s2 p2 o2
16:00:36 <niklasl> q+
16:00:37 <pchampin> q+
16:00:56 <AndyS> gkellogg: considering entailments this happens
16:01:05 <ora> ack niklasl
16:01:57 <AndyS> niklasl: need multiple "occurences" - RHS cardinality of one - functional properties => different names for the same thing.
16:02:02 <ora> ack pchampin
16:02:26 <AndyS> pchampin: function properties re in OWL
16:02:32 <TallTed> present+
16:02:33 <tl> q+
16:02:44 <AndyS> ... so baked into RDF, that sneaked in owl:sameAs
16:02:48 <AndyS> q+
16:03:10 <AndyS> s/sneaked/sneaks/
16:03:27 <enrico> q+
16:03:35 <AndyS> pchampin: not a strong syntax constraint because
16:03:48 <pchampin> :e rdf:hasTriple  <( :s :p "42"^^xsd:integer )>.
16:03:53 <pchampin> :e rdf:hasTriple  <( :s :p "042"^^xsd:integer )>.
16:04:13 <AndyS> pchampin: ... syntactical different in RDF
16:04:29 <olaf> scribe+
16:04:33 <niklasl> +1 no there being many problems with cardinality constraints
16:04:46 <AndyS> scribe-
16:04:56 <ora> ack tl
16:05:15 <olaf> tl: why would 'refersTo' not work?
16:05:22 <pchampin> q+
16:05:25 <olaf> ... it is a pretty good description
16:05:29 <Souri> So, just to confirm, we are planning to allow: :e rdf:hasTriple <( :s1 :p1 :o1 >), <( :s2 :p2 :o2 >) . Is that correct?
16:05:51 <ora> ack AndyS
16:05:55 <Souri> s/>)/)>/
16:05:56 <olaf> even if "refers to" doesn't sound very familar to me, I like it
16:06:14 <TallTed> s/>)/)>/
16:06:20 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:06:21 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/02/16-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:06:28 <olaf> AndyS: regarding the cardinality, we can add it as an advice
16:06:38 <olaf> ... rather than baking it into RDF
16:06:47 <ora> ack enrico
16:06:47 <pchampin> "if you use the same name for different [occurrences], *all bets are off*"
16:07:04 <olaf> enrico: the point is not the card.constraint
16:07:26 <olaf> ... we want a many-to-many relationship
16:07:49 <TallTed> s/even if/... even if/
16:07:53 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:07:55 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/02/16-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:08:38 <olaf> ... no equality in RDF apart from the equality regarding literals (their values)
16:09:00 <olaf> ... if triple terms are syntactical equal, they need to denote the same resource
16:09:25 <pchampin> for me, what enrico describes is referential transparency
16:09:33 <olaf> ... triples that have the same denotation for the elements should ...
16:09:44 <olaf> ... the same for the datatype system
16:10:39 <olaf> ... if triple terms occur somewhere else, they become a mess because they produce equivalence all over the place
16:10:57 <olaf> ... long discussion we need to have
16:11:17 <olaf> ... option 3 should be discarded by Andy's original proposal
16:11:41 <olaf> ... which is equally expressive but avoids the equivalence-related issues
16:12:09 <olaf> ... The problem of unicity, cardinality etc is much more complex
16:13:18 <AndyS> q+
16:13:37 <olaf> ... In RDF plain, the equaliyt of literals does not show up, it shows up only in SPARQL
16:13:51 <ora> ack pchampin
16:13:52 <olaf> ... with triple terms, it shows up already in RDF
16:14:22 <olaf> pchampin: enrico can you write down an example where the issue of equality occurs?
16:14:40 <olaf> ... maybe take this offline
16:15:11 <ora> ack AndyS
16:15:24 <AndyS> << :e | :s :p :o >> :source <foo> . :e :seen "date" .
16:15:30 <olaf> AndyS: problem we identified with putting named occurrence in the data model
16:15:38 <AndyS> << :e | :s :p :o >> :source <foo> . <<: e | :s :p :o >> :seen "date" .
16:16:03 <Souri> s/: e/:e/
16:16:20 <olaf> ... There may be two different (occurrence) terms referring to the same
16:16:58 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:16:59 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/02/16-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:17:35 <pchampin> or:   :e :source <foo> . << :e | :s :p :o >> :seen "date" .
16:17:35 <olaf> ... Because there would be two different ways to refer to the named occurrence
16:17:35 <olaf> ... one by simply using :e
16:17:35 <olaf> ... the other one by using the occurrence term
16:17:51 <olaf> ... << :e | :s :p :o >>
16:17:59 <ora> q?
16:18:23 <olaf> ... enrico, which original proposal do you mean?
16:18:30 <olaf> enrico: the one in December
16:18:50 <olaf> AndyS: Ah, that is an expansion which doesn't have this problem
16:19:01 <olaf> ... and in fact that is Option 3 in the table
16:19:20 <pchampin> q+
16:19:21 <olaf> ora: anything else to discuss?
16:19:29 <ora> ack pchampin
16:19:42 <olaf> pchampin: regarding hasTriple, which doesn't have a lot of support
16:19:44 <enrico> <( :s :p "42"^^xsd:integer )> :p :o . entails <( :s :p "o42"^^xsd:integer )> :p :o .
16:20:18 <tl> i prefer "refersTo" to "hasTriple"
16:20:24 <olaf> ... my advice is to consider whether the term that we choose for this predicate is to consider it for a marriage example
16:20:38 <niklasl> What's the common relationship between a Fact/Mention/Quote/Event/Marriage/Relationship and "its" triple(s)?
16:20:42 <olaf> ... Then, refersTo, mentions, don't work
16:21:02 <olaf> s/mentions, don/mentions, etc. don
16:21:34 <olaf> pchampin: hasTriple has the advantage of being neutral
16:21:42 <olaf> tl: no really not
16:21:50 <Souri> rdf:refersTo conveys a sense of a uniqueness -- does not "allow" multiplicity
16:22:00 <olaf> ... because it has a very strong conotation to refer to the triple
16:22:41 <pchampin> tl, the thing on the RHS *is* a triple, isn't it?
16:22:44 <olaf> AndyS: what should we bring back to the wider WG?
16:22:47 <tl> "refersTo" IMO works very well for all kinds of reference: the triple itself and what the triple is about
16:23:02 <olaf> ora: We have identified things that need to be defined, and things that need to be renamed
16:23:12 <olaf> ... and we have some suggestions.
16:23:43 <Souri> I prefer rdf:has... than rdf:refersTo based on the fact that we are not constraining to cardinality of 1
16:23:44 <olaf> ... Naming is difficult.  tl has a valid point.
16:24:00 <olaf> ... and we concluded that rdf:nameOf is not on the list
16:24:05 <tl> s/because it has a very strong conotation to refer to the triple/because it has a very strong conotation to refer to the triple as a syntactic construct (vs what the triple is about)
16:24:17 <olaf> AndyS: I can write a very short summary for the mailing list
16:24:20 <pchampin> +1
16:24:22 <niklasl> +1
16:24:30 <pchampin> q+
16:24:37 <Souri> s/conotation/connotation/
16:24:39 <ora> ack pchampin
16:25:18 <olaf> pchampin: We also need a name for the syntactic construct that enrico calls the "macro".
16:25:50 <olaf> ... i.e., the Turtle expression of the form << :s :p :o >>
16:26:20 <olaf> ... or of the form << :e | :s :p :o >>
16:27:11 <pchampin> RRSAgent, make minutes
16:27:12 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/02/16-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin
16:27:38 <TallTed> previous meeting: https://www.w3.org/2024/02/15-rdf-star-minutes.html
16:27:49 <TallTed> next meeting: https://www.w3.org/2024/02/23-rdf-star-minutes.html
16:28:09 <TallTed> meeting: RDF-star Semantics TF
16:28:18 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:28:19 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/02/16-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:28:56 <olaf> olaf has left #rdf-star
16:29:47 <pchampin> s/niklas:/niklasl:/
16:29:49 <pchampin> RRSAgent, make minutes
16:29:50 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/02/16-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin
16:30:17 <TallTed> RRSAgent, pointer?
16:30:17 <RRSAgent> See https://www.w3.org/2024/02/16-rdf-star-irc#T16-30-17
16:30:52 <pchampin> s/niklas:/niklasl:/g
16:31:56 <pchampin> s/gregg:/gkellogg:/g
16:32:43 <pchampin> RRSAgent, make minutes
16:32:45 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/02/16-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin
16:33:35 <pchampin> s/gkellog:/gkellogg:/g
16:34:02 <pchampin> RRSAgent, make minutes
16:34:03 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/02/16-rdf-star-minutes.html pchampin
16:38:06 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
16:42:34 <TallTed> Zakim, who's here?
16:43:59 <pchampin> zakim, bye
16:43:59 <Zakim> Zakim has left #rdf-star
16:44:02 <pchampin> RRSAgent, bye
16:44:02 <RRSAgent> I see no action items
16:44:03 <Zakim> ... AZ, fsasaki, Souri
<pchampin> present+ doerthe
<pchampin> present+ pfps
<pchampin> chair: ora