- From: Simon Steyskal <simon.steyskal@wu.ac.at>
- Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2015 07:42:34 +0200
- To: kcoyle@kcoyle.net
- Cc: public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org
That's why I have suggested "sh:exactCount" (I only preferred "-count" variations over "-cardinality" out of pragmatism, but ofc I would be fine with "-cardinality" too) simon --- DDipl.-Ing. Simon Steyskal Institute for Information Business, WU Vienna www: http://www.steyskal.info/ twitter: @simonsteys Am 2015-04-07 04:13, schrieb Karen Coyle: > OK, I see that OWL has ObjectExactCardinality. However, many > programming languages as well as SQL have something called "count" > which is a function that counts the number of occurrences of > something. So, > > 1. that OWL has this feature does not make it a commonly used feature > in the IT world > 2. the name "count" is going to be horribly confusing > > If this must exist, then a name closer to "exactCardinality" is called > for. "Count" is not going to be ok. > > kc > > On 4/6/15 6:46 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote: >> 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 05:43:01 UTC