W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org > January 2015

Re: Definition of Shape

From: Jose Emilio Labra Gayo <jelabra@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 21:03:51 +0100
Message-ID: <CAJadXXJXc9kXa6x5-uPPvjVGP=5aTt5_N014=NRGL6YfJyRBCg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
Cc: RDF Data Shapes Working Group <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
> Yes, but I think we should have a simple definition of what a Shape is
>> and I think this definition could be it.
> +1 for simple definition

Great. I really think we should have a definition of what a Shape is in the
context of this group. I think during the last call someone said that it
was not clear what a Shape was, I don't remember whom...and that's why I
though we should give it a try.

Looking at the glossary, I noticed that it didn't appear Shape as a basic
concept and I thought it made sense to try to give a definition of Shape in
the context of this group.

 I also think that in the
>> context of this group we can differentiate between a constraint and a
>> shape, saying that a shape is a set of constraints on some RDF node.
> Does the shape constrain? or does it define? In the Dublin Core work the
> "shape" was called a "description" -- it describes the graph and the
> desired rules for the graph. Whether one uses those rules to constrain, or
> to inform, or to reject, or to simply shake one's head in dismay is a
> matter for the application that applies the rules. "Shape expressions" is
> very close to this meaning, and is looked on favorably within the DC
> community.

I tried to be as general as possible while maintaining a useful definition.
Do you think it would be better to change the definition to something like:

"A Shape is a set of definitions over the triples that involve a given RDF
node." ?

I would not oppose to that change...the main point, I think, is that a
shape can be compound from several other basic constraints (or definitions)
and that it involves the triples that depart and that arrive to a given RDF

Best regards, Jose Labra

> kc
>> Apart from that, we can maintain the definitions of "constraint",
>> "scoped constraint" and "unscoped constraint" which I also think they
>> make sense.
>> Best regards, Jose Labra
>>     peter
>>     On 01/23/2015 10:10 AM, Jose Emilio Labra Gayo wrote:
>>      > I edited the Glossary page to add a possible definition of shape
>> as:
>>      >
>>      > "A Shape is a set of constraints over the properties and objects
>>     of an
>>      > RDF node"
>>      >
>>      > I think it is in accordance with the use of the term in the WG
>>     and does
>>      > not enter in conflict with other terms.
>>      >
>>      > -- Saludos, Labra
>>     -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>     Version: GnuPG v1
>>     iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUwqFwAAoJECjN6+QThfjzeGgIALSkMbDZSfxnNqslwhRHbfsl
>>     HdiJUBCvIq2vzRm9TKRO139ochhm/tq+wRrpGF5fGPp8H7VLRcVzLXjMSR/ys9bK
>>     mbMPx7eWPJAE8BrTcTgcsaDsCBv12+AriJ+4Kged1TajCiecqALrN39zV7+eVYQO
>>     wMOiG1hul/MDtuCLFE3Dd+abm3b1CRXOuI/QYQcVsZ6KEtfnCgaxdeCG+bQd/ZxX
>>     inKsVZIIo8ozpGpGfb1tdJPkpw8WAGy6jObqPAh06wYpi+v7dIGOFDG1YRbulzYx
>>     GDa8FHlRU8cZ8DbDBEDebDPDM0UR3/IEMWgI/0dn20c+ZaE9tNckunAmsj6dSfI=
>>     =iFnH
>>     -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> --
>> Saludos, Labra
> --
> Karen Coyle
> kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
> m: 1-510-435-8234
> skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600

Saludos, Labra
Received on Saturday, 24 January 2015 20:04:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Saturday, 24 January 2015 20:04:40 UTC