- From: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
- Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2015 11:46:58 +1000
- To: public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org
A hypothetical property sh:count in addition to sh:minCount and sh:maxCount would be equivalent to OWL having owl:cardinality in addition to owl:minCardinality and owl:maxCardinality. From the current state of https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/Facet_Property_Names it looks like there is a slight majority in favor of adding such a third property. We need to keep in mind that a lot of people edit Turtle/JSON files by hand, so although I am working for a company specializing in editing tools, we cannot really rely on interactive tools to create the min/max statements for us. Having said this, there is also an argument to be made against having multiple ways to state the same thing, so I don't really have a strong opinion either way. Holger On 4/5/2015 4:29, Karen Coyle wrote: > I'm not familiar with any prior use of "count" to mean "min and max > cardinalities have the same value." Can anyone enlighten me as to > where else that is used? > > kc > > On 4/2/15 4:20 PM, RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: >> shapes-ISSUE-38 (Cardinality facet): Naming of cardinality facets >> [SHACL Spec] >> >> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/38 >> >> Raised by: Holger Knublauch >> On product: SHACL Spec >> >> See https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/Facet_Property_Names >> >> How should the facet properties for cardinalities be called, and do >> we need a property for min+max count? Please cast your vote on the >> page linked above. >> >> >> >> >
Received on Tuesday, 7 April 2015 01:48:20 UTC