- From: Arthur Ryman <arthur.ryman@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2015 15:50:13 -0400
- To: "public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org" <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
I reviewed Peter's spec [1] and have some feedback. First, I think this is a positive contribution and is complementary to Holger's spec. This spec is a great example of how to define the semantics of a language by translating that language into SPARQL. We can use this approach with other language proposals. The semantics of the language is not completely defined using SPARQL. There is an upper control layer that is described informally. If we make this upper control layer a little more flexible then we should be able to support recursion. The Extended Condition Language is somewhat low level and it would be difficult to use by anyone who does not understand how it is translated into SPARQL. I believe we need a higher level language for the non-SPARQL user. A more serious limitation is that there is no template mechanism, which means that non-SPARQL users contain use extensions defined by SPARQL users. We need a mechanism that allows either Core or Extended conditions to be packaged and invoked like macros. I have other comments and will put them in additional messages. [1] https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/Shacl-sparql
Received on Monday, 27 April 2015 19:50:40 UTC