Re: reworded requirements for section 3 Complex Constraints

* Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com> [2015-02-07 10:29+1000]
> 
> On 2/6/15 5:57 PM, Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote:
> >Again, with Holger's approval, I'll make these changes.
> 
> I believe the main driver for all these changes was to react to
> Peter's objections. So I suggest you keep working on your branch
> until Peter is satisfied and then the rest of the group checks
> whether this compromise is still acceptable to them.

Apart from the one that I interpreted as being about extensibility, I
think Peter and I are content with my proposed wording. Can you give
feedback on the first req, which I interpreted as being about
extensibility and Peter interpreted as being about core expressivity.


-The language should allow users to implement constraints that check
complex conditions, with an expressivity as covered by the following
sub-requirements (e.g. basic graph patterns, string and mathematical
operations and comparison of multiple values).

+==== Constraint Extensions ====
+ +Shapes will have a defined extension mechanism enabling other
languages to provide supplementary constraints, (e.g.  basic graph
patterns, string and mathematical operations and comparison of
multiple values).



> Holger
> 
> 

-- 
-ericP

office: +1.617.599.3509
mobile: +33.6.80.80.35.59

(eric@w3.org)
Feel free to forward this message to any list for any purpose other than
email address distribution.

There are subtle nuances encoded in font variation and clever layout
which can only be seen by printing this message on high-clay paper.

Received on Tuesday, 10 February 2015 19:46:38 UTC