Re: fixing http://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/shacl/

On 9/7/15 9:15 AM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> I feel that the version of http://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/shacl/
> that I reviewed (dated 10 August 2015) has three fatal problems.
> - It does not reflect working group consensus.
> - It provides a poor and misleading description of SHACL.
> - It has  multiple severe technical problems.
> Fixing of any of these problems requires significant changes to the
> document.
>
> Fixing the worst aspects of these problems requires at least the following
> changes:
> - Writing an introduction that reasonably describes SHACL.
+1
> - Replacing the example that uses controversial aspects of SHACL.
Which example is this?
> - Using a well-defined vocabulary to describe the major SHACL notions.
+1 - presumably we could list the terms and arrive at a consensus
> - Correctly describing the relationship between SHACL and RDFS and SPARQL.
It would be nice to hear what you think this is.
> - Discussing recursive shapes.
> - Fixing or removing the UML diagrams.
Specificially, what is wrong with them?
> - Fixing the description of how violations are reported.
... and what is wrong with it?

Personally, I have no idea what you mean by these criticisms, and need 
quite a bit more explanation. I really liked your proposed wordings, so 
I'm hoping there is something to be done in these areas. But without 
more detail this does not help me understand.

kc
>
>
>
> Peter F. Patel-Schneider
> Nuance Communications
>
>

-- 
Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600

Received on Tuesday, 8 September 2015 06:17:26 UTC