SPARQL in SHACL (was Re: shapes-ISSUE-41 (property paths (sh:path?)): Using property paths to refer to values/types? [SHACL Spec])

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hmm.

I thought that the feature being discussed was a macro language, which would
dramatically lessen the need for having an expressive high-level language.
However, on further reading I see that the feature being discussed could
also be just the ability to use SPARQL as true parts of queries or shapes,
which does not have as much of an effect.

I do agree that this latter question needs to be decided, and hopefully
soon.  Making decisions about what is and what is not in the high-level
language without knowing what the underpinnings of SHACL are is a futile
exercise.

peter



On 04/08/2015 06:52 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote:
> On 4/9/2015 10:49, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
>> 
>> Well, at least we have a proposal for an extension mechanism.
>> 
>> Whether it is something that the WG will endorse and whether it is
>> elegant are less clear.
> 
> Unless we want to turn in infinite circles we should officially approve
> or reject the ability to embed SPARQL queries as constraints as soon as
> possible. Without such a decision, how could we even decide what goes
> into the core high-level language? Or shall we pre-emptively reinvent our
> own SPARQL variant just in case the real SPARQL doesn't make it into the
> standard?!
> 
> Holger
> 
> 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVJeTnAAoJECjN6+QThfjztYwH/R6K+H0tB2izGMdgSI0uK0DO
BuXS0hDAtAHuM8A3CTTHqq4lAzfpqmbtgITyVZsdr0QwqCyM78hjNBXfyGPYcNOS
MTopK4cvf2CE9QNAWhs7IDLUo2qB5d+BA9jZ01oSf/lpY62Bx2gSGUeq9hZPs79S
MjCg6yJsNS6eb8KB3nLYC1fI49RsTkO2Xhuh6ZAp+vh6jnBel72V6B/SjchXJVxT
3yIba5OEuu/c+GaREPOrWoew7FNjXwD1umt7zMzNk/h/ia4RMbNhr63G6LCbczGk
12DB+ZT4SIYbB7AwT9mqTtO2PsgnegTXihqzvF7NNYBC3GMQl9Cdu2t/uuDU5P4=
=ZoSD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Received on Thursday, 9 April 2015 02:33:42 UTC