- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2015 12:22:20 -0700
- To: kcoyle@kcoyle.net, public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 An extreme version of SHACL as a high-level language with an extension mechanism can be found in the Shape Expressions W3C Submission at http://www.w3.org/Submission/2014/03/ where only a core is given a semantics and extensions beyond the core are given only a cursory treatment. This sort of treatment is also present in the axiomatic semantics for SHACL at http://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/semantics/Axiomatic which only gives semantics for the high-level language. I believe that there needs to be a complete semantic treatment for both parts of SHACL. peter On 04/01/2015 11:38 AM, Karen Coyle wrote: > Peter, I wouldn't consider the extension mechanism an "add-on." It has to > be fully integrated with the SHACL language. However, I'm not sure how > this changes the work of the group, nor if that distinction is > significant for users of SHACL. Perhaps you could say more about your > concern? > > kc > > On 3/28/15 1:39 PM, RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: >> shapes-ISSUE-32 (SHACL+-): SHACL = high-level + extensions ? [SHACL >> Spec] >> >> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/32 >> >> Raised by: Peter Patel-Schneider On product: SHACL Spec >> >> Is SHACL going to be a high-level language with an extension mechanism >> as an add-on or is SHACL going to be a single language with some >> portion of it designated as the simple portion? >> >> >> >> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVHEVsAAoJECjN6+QThfjzdIgH/jafpe0bQZxcZHliaKuiaWpQ RuuicB8kZAeXHC6XqfC2+h0iZlccJjUN/pVWi6+ZkjZkxbczz4ZtRR/h7szLUqbf +AGXCM5M1nr/HSxpIZtcRxaPsjAusYEhfsmdlTQwT3vgmDGcSLOw6Ds+4OyuUaof KjA6yyLxk356kTfp9vqoYfk/Pr/o/2lRFCgN84ydcnzUT9BfhlGZOnY+uaGWg75y y+68RBVE5K0L7wWxF27HlCGHHZfdKdJhZ0+ggCV3h+cX52F/m7pZN6hwWHFbxj74 4Xr0peQvK5rHc7LHSYH+I1uh0+HVr7p2rI8248og9MZ0koN6LlIKAElL+PTesKo= =tfgy -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Wednesday, 1 April 2015 19:22:50 UTC