Re: Comments on Shacl-sparql Specification

On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 7:50 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider
<pfpschneider@gmail.com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On 04/27/2015 12:50 PM, Arthur Ryman wrote:
>> 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.
>
> I would like to see how this would work.
>

I'll write up something.

-- Arthur

Received on Tuesday, 28 April 2015 18:02:24 UTC