Re: Extending SPIN with meta-templates


nobody is stating that ShEx is now excluded. We are just saying that it 
faces an uphill battle against established technologies. SPARQL does not 
only have thousands of users but also hundreds of tools, APIs, hundreds 
of research papers written about it, at least one book, a dozen or so 
databases with native support and a long history at W3C etc. SPIN is a 
thin layer on top of SPARQL, while all hard problems have already been 
solved by SPARQL. To build SPIN constraints, people can use any existing 
SPARQL editor, run tests etc with established tools.


On 11/12/2014 8:32, Karen Coyle wrote:
> On 11/11/14 12:33 PM, Irene Polikoff wrote:
>> We should strive to use and align, as much as possible, with existing 
>> syntaxes, approaches, etc. If they can't support the requirements and 
>> can't be easily extended to support the requirements, only then it 
>> makes the argument for something completely new. It would be to 
>> cavalier not to have this as a criteria.
> Align, yes, but pre-limit to, no. If we took that attitude, we'd still 
> be programming in COBOL. My experience is that people gravitate rather 
> quickly to new technologies that they find fit their needs. Otherwise 
> we wouldn't have Java, Ruby, Python, Ruby-on-Rails, iPython, PHP, 
> JS.... and on and on.
> So before rejecting ShEx *because* it is new, we should look at what 
> we are trying to do, and the best way to do it. "New" is not an a 
> priori reason for rejection.
> kc

Received on Tuesday, 11 November 2014 22:53:29 UTC