- From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 17:09:39 -0700
- To: "public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org" <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
On 8/10/16 3:47 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote: > Hi Karen, > > in terms of a data model, targets, shapes and constraints are classes. > They actually have corresponding rdfs:Classes in the Turtle file. So one > way of explaining them, in addition to an abstract syntax, is to > introduce the data model. I had a UML-like diagram in earlier versions, > a variant of which I believe would still be a good thing to have. It > would show how the concepts are connected and possibly appeal to a > certain technical audience. > > Having gone through the spec recently I also cannot help but think that > most people will understand SHACL simply by following and copying the > design patterns from the examples. So I believe it's good to have as > many examples as possible. Examples are important, but that does not mean that the text should be unclear. > > Other than that I am left wondering what conclusions I should draw from > your observations. For example, I don't see why targets or constraints > would need to be defined as shapes, because Filters are. Do you have > suggestions on how to improve the flow? I did not suggest that constraints and targets should be defined as shapes. I asked about an inconsistency in the definitions. To my mind, the outlier is filters. Shape := label:IRI|BNode, targets:Set[Target], filters:Set[Shape], constraints:Set[Constraint] kc > > Thanks, > Holger > > > On 10/08/2016 2:07, Karen Coyle wrote: >> Holger, the way section 2 now reads there are targets, filter shapes, >> and constraints. Filters are defined as shapes, but neither targets >> nor constraints are defined in that way. This seems inconsistent and >> the actual meaning of shape seems less clear. Sometimes it seems to >> refer to the set of targets, filters and constraints, sometimes it >> seems to refer to an individual filter segment. >> >> In the abstract syntax we have: >> >> Shape := label:IRI|BNode, scopes:Set[Scope], filters:Set[Shape], >> constraints:Set[Constraint] >> >> Using target that will become: >> >> Shape := label:IRI|BNode, targets:Set[Target], filters:Set[Shape], >> constraints:Set[Constraint] >> >> kc >> >> >> >> On 8/8/16 5:20 PM, Arnaud Le Hors wrote: >>> Thanks Holger for the update. Let's talk on Thursday about the >>> requirements to move the spec to Candidate Recommendation (CR). >>> Unfortunately I don't think we're quite there yet. Here is quick run >>> through the main requirements: >>> >>> * all known issues impacting conformance of an implementation have been >>> closed. >>> * proof of wide review - we need to publish a draft and broadly announce >>> it calling for public comments prior to moving to CR >>> * test suite - we at least need to have the framework in place that the >>> specification can point to >>> * exit criteria - how do we define what it will take to exit CR - >>> typically a minimum of two implementations of every feature >>> >>> So, for now, please, everyone, review the spec and let's see on Thursday >>> whether we can agree to publish the updated spec. >>> >>> Eric and Karen, if you have a chance to update the abstract syntax draft >>> that'd be great. Please, let the WG know when you're done. >>> >>> Thanks. >>> -- >>> Arnaud Le Hors - Senior Technical Staff Member, Open Web Technologies - >>> IBM Cloud >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> From: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com> >>> To: "public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org" <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org> >>> Date: 08/08/2016 04:17 PM >>> Subject: Editing progress >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> >>> >>> FYI I did a complete pass through the spec over the last couple of days >>> and fixed a number of inconsistencies and buglets. Dimitris also did >>> some updates. In the upcoming meeting we may want to decide to press the >>> publish button again? I would be interested to hear what is missing with >>> respect to reaching the next phase of the W3C process. >>> >>> Holger >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > > > -- Karen Coyle kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
Received on Thursday, 11 August 2016 00:10:12 UTC