Re. your question about using RDF collections instead of RDF-star quoted triples: there are several differences, but the most important one is that everytime you write << :s :p :o >> in a turtle-star file, you refer to the *same* triple. 1/2
@wohnjalker is it really better to say that a movie has actor a PerformanceRole? 😈 But fully agreed, naming matters, and my name choice in this example was poor. Renamed it to "withPerformanceRole".
to complement: 1) You need to introduce a *node* -- it does not have to be blank. 2) The example in the RDF-star spec presents a patter, that can be generalized: different relations between a quoted triple and its occurrences/realizations/roles...
I see one clear benefit in the RDF-star approach: it does not "destruct" the original triple (assuming you want to qualify a role that still holds). With the intermediate "role" node, you need to query your data differently for "simple" relations and "qualified" relations.
This is beyond ironic. I'm stranded in Vienna after a workshop about *interoperability*. The reason: a defective headset in the BA plane's cockpit, and the only compatible headset they can find has to be delivered from London!
And *literally* as we were having this workshop, @bblfish and others were discussing very similar things, this time applied to Avro data :-) lists.w3.org/Archives/Public…
Wow. Our paper "The Problem with #XSD Binary Floating Point Datatypes in #RDF" is nominated for the best paper award at #eswc2022. This little side project has escalated a bit. @fusionUniJena@eswc_conf
"The Problem with XSD Binary Floating Point Datatypes in RDF", authored along with Merle Gänßinger, got accepted at #eswc2022. 🎉 We question the broad use of xsd:float and xsd:double in #RDF due to potential systematic distortion of numeric #LinkedData. @eswc_conf@fusionUniJena
Interesting read. Unfortunately, it contains inaccuracies. "If the statement had been made again, despite referring to the exact three resources, it would have been a different assertion." See w3.org/2021/12/rdf-star.html…@kurt_cagle
If a fact-checker quotes somebody else's statements as an RDF graph, this RDF graph should comply with RDF's monotoic semantics, whether they endorse it or not. Otherwise, they are misquoting.
However, the question of monotonicity is orthogonal to that. Any RDF file makes a set of statement, and entails every subset of these statements. .../...
I agree that a random RDF file found on the web should not in general be considered as a claim by whoevever "owns" that file (for some definition of "owns"). .../...