Re: shapes-ISSUE-27 (extensions-in-highlevel): Can extension constraints be used in the high-level language? [SHACL Spec] from Arthur Ryman on 2015-04-07 (public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org from April 2015)

From: Arthur Ryman <arthur.ryman@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2015 17:10:04 -0400
To: Irene Polikoff <irene@topquadrant.com>
Cc: "kcoyle@kcoyle.net" <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>, "public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org" <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CAApBiOkmcqa6Pi+_YrLpQdGia+J2Q-GTCnEb4PwLDwKk4GvfxQ@mail.gmail.com>

We have been combining two different concepts in this discussion,
namely 1) the HL language, and 2) a HL language processor.

The HL language contains a fixed set of vocabulary terms and constraints.

I agree that when you wrap a SPARQL constraint in a template, then the
low level details are hidden, so invoking the template should be very
similar to using part of the built-in HL language.

However, a HL language processor cannot be expected to process these
templates. It is only required to process the fixed HL vocabulary.

-- Arthur Ryman

Received on Tuesday, 7 April 2015 21:10:31 UTC