Re: shapes-ISSUE-45 (SPARQL-extension): Should SPARQL be a built-in extension language [SHACL Spec]

Holger, it would help if you could define what you mean by "built-in." 
Do you mean included in the spec? If so, included as a complete 
solution, as an example, ?????

Thanks,
kc

On 4/16/15 5:23 PM, RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
> shapes-ISSUE-45 (SPARQL-extension): Should SPARQL be a built-in extension language [SHACL Spec]
>
> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/45
>
> Raised by: Holger Knublauch
> On product: SHACL Spec
>
> I think there is enough agreement that SHACL should have an "extension" language to cover cases not addressed by the core vocabulary, and to define new high-level terms (templates). I believe we should get the question clarified whether SPARQL is such an extension language. This question is independent of whether other languages such as JavaScript could also be supported - that would be another ISSUE.
>
> PROPOSAL: SHACL should include SPARQL as an extension language.
>
>
>
>

-- 
Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600

Received on Friday, 17 April 2015 00:49:36 UTC