Re: shapes-ISSUE-23 (punning): Shapes, classes and punning [SHACL Spec]

Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com> wrote on 04/03/2015 09:22:49 PM:

> ... Does the notion of 
> entailment appeal to people coming into SHACL from some mainstream OO 
> technology?

Holger,

I don't mean to pick on you but that's another point on which I get 
confused by your various statements. On some issues being discussed like 
this one you seem to want to cater to the non-RDF people, yet when it 
comes to discussing the semantics you argue that SPARQL is a perfect 
choice because that's what people know. These can't be the same people 
you're talking about, right? So, which is our target?
We have a long standing open issue on who our audience is that maybe we 
ought to discuss a bit more if audience is used to justify technical 
choices.
--
Arnaud  Le Hors - Senior Technical Staff Member, Open Web Technologies - 
IBM Software Group


> ... 
> Holger
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-entailment/#RDFSEntRegime
> 
>