- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 11:49:34 -0700
- To: Irene Polikoff <irene@topquadrant.com>
- Cc: public-rdf-shapes@w3.org
The latter, in this case. However, there are situations in SHACL-SPARQL where implementations can come up with different validity conclusions when processing the same data against the same not ill-formed shapes graph. peter On 03/20/2017 11:37 AM, Irene Polikoff wrote: > Peter, > > Please clarify. Do you mean to say that two implementations could come to a > different validity conclusion when processing the same data against the same > not ill-formed graph? Or do you simply mean to say that they are not required > to let the user know that the shapes graph is well formed? > >> On Mar 20, 2017, at 1:01 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider >> <pfpschneider@gmail.com <mailto:pfpschneider@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> The >> bigger part of this problem is not behaviour of SHACL implementations on >> ill-formed shapes graphs but their behaviour on shapes graphs that are not >> ill-formed. >
Received on Monday, 20 March 2017 18:50:09 UTC