Re: Proposal to close ISSUE-26 based on sh:hasShape

The current editor's draft uses a particular mechanism for the extension
langauge to invoke named expressions, but the particular mechanism there does
not need to be used to invoke named shapes, independent of the syntax used for
this purpose.


As far as I can tell, there are at least two potenntial connections between
the extension language and the core language:
1/ Invoking named shapes from the extension language.
2/ Embedding core constructs (e.g., conjunctions) in expressions written in
the extension language.
A clearer statement of ISSUE-26 would be to just say:
  Can the extension language invoke named shapes.


peter


On 07/27/2015 04:39 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote:
> ISSUE-26 [1] is about whether extensions such as SPARQL can invoke the
> high-level language. I believe this needs to be answered individually for each
> extension language. For SPARQL, my proposal to resolve this is as currently
> drafted, by relying on the sh:hasShape function:
> 
>     http://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/shacl-ref/#hasShape
> 
> I would be OK with a solution that makes this function *optional* if we find
> work-arounds to all places where it is currently used. But I believe this
> capability is generally useful and greatly extends what users can achieve with
> SHACL.
> 
> Holger
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/26
> 

Received on Tuesday, 28 July 2015 14:43:05 UTC