- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 08:22:52 -0800
- To: Dimitris Kontokostas <kontokostas@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>
- CC: Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@us.ibm.com>, public-data-shapes-wg <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 02/11/2015 07:39 AM, Dimitris Kontokostas wrote: > [...] >> I think the core definition syntax can be orthogonal to both issues. >> IBM Resource Shapes Resource Shape the submission to W3C? http://www.w3.org/Submission/2014/SUBM-shapes-20140211/ Or OSLC Resource Shape in open-services.net? Or something different? I'll assume the first for now. >> is an example that handles both scoped & unscoped constraints already. Well, maybe. I'm still finding it very hard to figure out just what Resource Shape is supposed to be doing. I understand ShExC, and I understand how you could use some of the vocabulary described in the W3C submission to control ShExC (maybe not the same way that is used in Resource Shape), but I get horribly confused when I read papers like OSLC Resource Shape: A language for defining constraints on Linked Data http://events.linkeddata.org/ldow2013/papers/ldow2013-paper-02.pdf By the way, I just noticed "A resource shape is a resource that describes the contents of, and constraints on, the RDF representation of other resources." in the Resource Shapes submission. This clears up the situation for me quite a bit, but why oh why isn't it called a shape resource or just a shape? >> The ldom proposal was IMO a good move but didn't bring consensus on >> this core shape definition part. The top-down approach that we are >> trying all this time does not lead to any conclusion and maybe a >> bottom-up might work. Maybe we can say that this is a temporary syntax >> that most people feel comfortable with and if requirements cannot be >> met we can adapt it accordingly. > >> Best, Dimitris > >> [1] https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/Technology_Name [2] >> https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/Core_Shape_Definition > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJU24HcAAoJECjN6+QThfjzg40H/iHI8BLgVEllBP8dhf52FzjY eEa6B6P2KbR21j+2CWEvzoQYvFdmK60U3LPLwsPxvhSXKKHXum2TW1Wm0Su/EJRP UpiZMQklUANMtENdU1V/YdXiclQFM+zs5wFdbjVOo5n+Ze06n4b4t9K86R8Q+sr1 5dItq6mNhQcbUbLZKBrNVhU7pcbbrOtKmYoXWZpgsmiFxO6PxxnKB9N68uoSlVt0 pqG+LBKkyrlvEgf4dHh/nclKLSUh9nJqozSO4HTseD8jErrY3tW3qx/FNTqOTiDC YYuJq6ukv2K5MCyG1a/NlZa4lhwpgZftOLwWbwTRS7nOlGA5yOfwQXQ/DIwB9JI= =X6fQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Wednesday, 11 February 2015 16:23:24 UTC