Meeting minutes
Next technical meeting (2024-06-06) -- "1. Map the steps to get to 2. vote on a working baseline and 3. map further work testing the use cases and verifying well-formness"
<enrico> :subject [ :namedNode | :property1 :value1; :property2 :value2 ] :object .
<enrico> :subject :namedNode :object .
<enrico> :namedNode :property1 :value1 .
<enrico> :namedNode :property2 :value2 .
<pchampin> https://
<gkellogg> http://
<enrico> https://
<niklasl> https://
https://
<<( ... )>> ==> <<(' ... ' )>>
Discussion on RDF-star CG Transparency Enabling Properties
Graph -- X rdf:reifies <<( :s :p :o >> . X rdf:anotationOf <<( :s :p :o >> .
Graph -- X rdf:reifies <<( :s :p :o )>> . X rdf:annotationOf <<( :s :p :o )>> .
<niklasl> So it's about "transparency allowing"?
<niklasl> :X rdf:reifies <<( :s :p :o >> . :s owl:sameAs s2 . # Entails :X rdf:reifies <<( :s2 :p :o >> . # if rdf:reifies is transparency-allowed
<gkellogg> :X rdf:reifies <<( :s :p "1"^^xsd:integer" )>> entails :X rdf:reifies <<( :s :p _:nnn )>>, <<( _:nnn rdf:type xsd:integer )>> .
<niklasl> only if you use both on the same subject; which defeat their points.
<niklasl> It's about entailment for these predicates, not the triple term.
<niklasl> 1. Triple terms are opaque. 2. rdf:annotationOf is functional. 3. rdf:reifies is regular (non-functional) but TEP.
SPARQL: { ?x ?p <<( :s :p :o )>> }
Summary -- 2 possibilities: case 1 - different triple terms <<(...)>> and <<('...')>>or case 2 one triple term - it is the property use that differentiates and this must appear in the "agreed syntax" forms.
<niklasl> Just like owl:sameAs is ... rather special....?
To be decided: Restricted syntax (triple term only as object of rdf:refiies/rdf:annotationOf) or general case (triple terms anywhere, well formnedness decides opaque/transparent)
3 case - triple term only as object (any property)