- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2015 07:06:52 -0800
- To: Jose Emilio Labra Gayo <jelabra@gmail.com>, Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- CC: Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>, "public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org" <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 If there are requirements that go beyond SPARQL then the working group is going to have to provide a specification for them that is acceptable to the working group and evidence of implementability of the specification. I don't think that this has been done for recursive shape recognition. peter On 03/01/2015 01:19 PM, Jose Emilio Labra Gayo wrote: [...] > One you have identified the language constructs you have to implement > them. SPARQL by itself is not enough as it doesn't handle, for example, > recursion so there is a need for something else. [...] > -- -- Jose Labra -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJU9HyMAAoJECjN6+QThfjzKYkH/1pbPB9/ctOq7/wNg8Q5V17C H7y5i5ZzS2EgaydkerdkJprY5urObQ/yaF/qPI6sc/CCm3x7bgF/FiBYoN7aThNm lUvKs6d9QcJuL0AgxaWTlop2HSCEKYTS0stZvtMuWDoahBHbyGNOxCB1BLYOha8V 6r+HyWM2OyrLTypKr/1B2ZacIJmT6wj+/rCfK72xmzLKjxHlgols4JmG16SPwHoy RNjXmjoZVqLy+C4iqDnlJCDNNjqwTYdIub5t7fWUPlEqX/ekLBCErLk3EaFbJP4X XINHKmj+AMXmbmKOVwf677+Qcc3T3zEK9WBXMp2mP3X+QySZOgty8Fz8Psm7qYc= =80ax -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Monday, 2 March 2015 15:07:23 UTC