- From: Michel Dumontier <michel.dumontier@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 23:20:16 -0700
- To: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
- Cc: RDF Data Shapes Working Group <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
+1 on sh:minCount, sh:maxCount, and sh:count m > On Mar 26, 2015, at 11:05 PM, Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com> wrote: > > Another question on the vocabulary. Does anyone object to using sh:minCount, sh:maxCount? If so, what would be the alternatives? I personally find sh:minCardinality too long, and sh:minCard too unclear. > > Shall we support sh:count as a short-cut for the case where min/maxCount are equal? The main use case of that would be sh:count = 1, and this is quite a common case. On the downside, it adds a bit complexity to the engines as there are multiple ways to state the same thing. > > Thanks > Holger > >
Received on Friday, 27 March 2015 06:20:45 UTC