- From: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
- Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 11:07:53 +1000
- To: public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org
Built-in here means part of the official spec (similar to how "my" draft does this right now) - part of the "Full" language. Not just an example, but mandatory for anyone claiming full SHACL support. HTH Holger On 4/17/2015 10:49, Karen Coyle wrote: > 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. >> >> >> >> >
Received on Friday, 17 April 2015 01:09:25 UTC