Re: $variables

Is this the right terminology:

RDF 1.1 Concepts:

https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/#h2_section-rdf-graph
[[
IRIs <https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/#dfn-iri>, literals 
<https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/#dfn-literal> and blank nodes 
<https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/#dfn-blank-node> are collectively 
known as RDF terms.
]]



On 08/07/16 16:56, Karen Coyle wrote:
> "Any node in the data graph that is equal to/the same as/matches (pick 
> one) the value of sh:nodescope in the SHACL graph is 'in scope'."
>
> That said, the RDF Concepts document[1] describes a triple as two 
> nodes (" node-arc-node "). Therefore "node" does not include the 
> predicate of a triple. Could someone confirm that is the case?
>
> kc
> [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/2014/REC-rdf11-concepts-20140225/
>
> On 7/8/16 8:11 AM, Arnaud Le Hors wrote:
>> Ok, but this isn't just a matter of hiding this when SPARQL is hidden. I
>> still want to understand what that sentence means when SPARQL isn't
>> hiddene. So, can you tell me what this sentence is supposed to be 
>> saying?
>>
>> A node scope with value $scopeNode, defines $scopeNode as the node
>> in-scope in the data graph.
>>
>> The way it reads to me is that a node scope has a variable $scopeNode as
>> a value, and that this defines the variable as the "node in-scope". What
>> does it mean for a scope node to have a value? And How does a node scope
>> with a value define the value as the "node in-scope"? And shouldn't that
>> rather be "node in scope"??
>>
>> As I said I just can't parse this sentence. I'd appreciate if someone
>> could rephrase.
>>
>> Unfortunately the spec remains hard to read and understand because of
>> stuff like this so I second the sentiment Karen conveys from the
>> community she represents. I understand English isn't the editors'
>> primary language and that's ok but given that I strongly encourage them
>> to welcome comments pointing these problems out.
>>
>> Thanks.
>> -- 
>> Arnaud  Le Hors - Senior Technical Staff Member, Open Web Technologies -
>> IBM Cloud
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From:        Dimitris Kontokostas 
>> <kontokostas@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>
>> To:        Arnaud Le Hors/Cupertino/IBM@IBMUS
>> Cc:        Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>, public-data-shapes-wg
>> <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
>> Date:        07/08/2016 01:38 AM
>> Subject:        Re: $variables
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>> You are right,
>> although the button exists we the spec does not flow well in some cases
>> when the sparql definitions are hidden
>> Holger created an issue to track this and we will try to have it ready
>> for review by the next call
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 8:09 AM, Arnaud Le Hors <_lehors@us.ibm.com_
>> <mailto:lehors@us.ibm.com>> wrote:
>> I have to agree with Karen. In fact, I will admit that I don't
>> understand what this sentence means:
>>
>> A node scope with value $scopeNode, defines $scopeNode as the node
>> in-scope in the data graph.
>>
>> Actually, I can't even quite parse this sentence. What's with that
>> comma? What's the subject of "defines"?
>>
>> I do understand the following:
>>
>> Node scopes are defined with the sh:scopeNode predicate. The values of
>> sh:scopeNode can be a IRIs or literals.
>>
>> Although the "a" seems to be a typo.
>> -- 
>> Arnaud  Le Hors - Senior Technical Staff Member, Open Web Technologies -
>> IBM Cloud
>>
>>
>> Karen Coyle <_kcoyle@kcoyle.net_ <mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net>> wrote on
>> 07/07/2016 08:52:00 PM:
>>
>>> From: Karen Coyle <_kcoyle@kcoyle.net_ <mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net>>
>>> To: _public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org_ 
>>> <mailto:public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
>>> Date: 07/07/2016 08:53 PM
>>> Subject: Re: $variables
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 7/7/16 4:59 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On 8/07/2016 9:45, Karen Coyle wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On 7/7/16 3:42 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On 8/07/2016 8:35, Karen Coyle wrote:
>>> >>>> On the call today I was told that the way to avoid the
>> complication of
>>> >>>> the $variables in the spec is to choose not to view the SPARQL 
>>> in the
>>> >>>> draft. However, even with the SPARQL hidden, the $variables are 
>>> still
>>> >>>> visible since they are part of the explanatory text. So this 
>>> does not
>>> >>>> solve the problem, and in fact it probably makes it worse because
>>> >>>> without the SPARQL the $variables make even less sense. For 
>>> example,
>>> >>>> with SPARQL definitions hidden, you see:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> **********
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> 2.1.1 Node scopes (sh:scopeNode)
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> A node scope with value $scopeNode, defines $scopeNode as the node
>>> >>>> in-scope in the data graph.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Node scopes are defined with the sh:scopeNode predicate. The
>> values of
>>> >>>> sh:scopeNode can be a IRIs or literals.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> *************
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> I think they need to be removed from the text, and moved into the
>>> >>>> SPARQL code area, and the text should be complete without using 
>>> them.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> That would be fine with me. I had used the values in SPARQL-like $
>>> >>> notation to make it easier to read for those who are familiar with
>>> >>> SPARQL because the SPARQL query and its description would match.
>> But if
>>> >>> the WG thinks this is too geeky, we can just drop the $ sign and
>> change
>>> >>> the CSS style around these variables.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> I do wonder what audience are we talking about here? What in
>> particular
>>> >>> is difficult to understand about the $ variables? The spec is not a
>>> >>> tutorial...
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Holger
>>> >>
>>> >> Holger, you always trot out this "not a tutorial" like anyone who 
>>> has
>>> >> any problem with the spec is some kind of backward dunce. I wish you
>>> >> would be less condescending and more open to hearing suggestions. 
>>> The
>>> >> folks who brought this up are key RDF programmers on projects like
>>> >> Europeana and DPLA. Hardly novices. But believe them when they say
>>> >> that it makes the reading and comprehension more difficult. Do not
>>> >> disparage them.
>>> >
>>> > The suggested change here is to drop the $ character before variable
>>> > names in the scope section. I am really surprised this would make a
>>> > difference, but said I have no problems with that.
>>>
>>> I'm pretty sure it isn't just a matter of dropping the $ - it doesn't
>>> make sense to say:
>>>
>>> "A node scope with value scopeNode, defines scopeNode as the node
>>> in-scope in the data graph."
>>>
>>> So some more adjustment of the text is going to be needed. Especially
>>> because there is sometimes more about SPARQL in the text, such as:
>>>
>>> *********
>>> 2.1.1 Node scopes (sh:scopeNode)
>>>
>>> A node scope with value $scopeNode, defines $scopeNode as the node
>>> in-scope in the data graph.
>>>
>>> Node scopes are defined with the sh:scopeNode predicate. The values of
>>> sh:scopeNode can be a IRIs or literals.
>>>
>>> The following SPARQL query specifies the semantics of node scopes. The
>>> variable $scopeNode is assumed to be pre-bound to the given value of
>>> sh:scopeNode.
>>>
>>> *******
>>>
>>> It doesn't make sense to say "The following SPARQL query...." when the
>>> SPARQL query is hidden.
>>>
>>> If we can agree on parameters of the edits, I'd be happy to pitch in a
>>> do some or all of the work. I'd say that the last paragraph belongs 
>>> with
>>> the SPARQL code, and the first sentence needs a different value 
>>> example,
>>> which should be uniform throughout where possible.
>>>
>>> I'd also reverse the first two paragraphs, which I think increases
>>> readability.
>>>
>>> kc
>>>
>>> >
>>> > What else would be needed to make the document more readable for the
>>> > audience you are referring to?
>>> >
>>> > Anyway, I think you are over-reacting in your personal criticism. 
>>> I am
>>> > merely collecting information to help me fulfill my editing role. 
>>> If I
>>> > were to accept every single viewpoint without asking for 
>>> clarifications
>>> > we would never reach a fixpoint - there are just too many different
>>> > viewpoints and potential audiences here.
>>> >
>>> > Holger
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Karen Coyle
>>> _kcoyle@kcoyle.net_ <mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net>_http://kcoyle.net_
>> <http://kcoyle.net/>
>>> m: 1-510-435-8234
>>> skype: kcoylenet/_+1-510-984-3600_ <tel:%2B1-510-984-3600>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Dimitris Kontokostas
>> Department of Computer Science, University of Leipzig & DBpedia 
>> Association
>> Projects: _http://dbpedia.org_ <http://dbpedia.org/>,
>> _http://rdfunit.aksw.org_ <http://rdfunit.aksw.org/>,
>> _http://aligned-project.eu_ <http://aligned-project.eu/>
>> Homepage: _http://aksw.org/DimitrisKontokostas_
>> Research Group: AKSW/KILT _http://aksw.org/Groups/KILT_
>>
>>
>>
>

Received on Monday, 11 July 2016 20:30:30 UTC