- From: Jose Emilio Labra Gayo <jelabra@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 21:14:50 +0100
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
- Cc: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>, RDF Data Shapes Working Group <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAJadXXJy3OM7rS1s++qVOMYU_UHK4yAyrOe5J_Po0K0DjChpqQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 5:48 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider < pfpschneider@gmail.com> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > The glossary that I put together was at least partly an attempt to answer > these sorts of questions. > Yes, and I really think it is very useful...that's why I dare to contribute :) In the glossary a shape (or unscoped constraint) is something that can only > be evaluated against something, e.g., people with at least two friends > would > be a shape. Do you propose that a Shape is the same as an "Unscoped constraint" ? If you think it is right so, should we put that definition in the "Shape" slot? I am asking because I thought that a glossary on a Data Shapes working group should have an entry on "Shapes"... What I was trying to stress with my proposal is that in the context of this group a shape involves the triples surrounding an RDF node. I think it is an important concept that can serve people who comes to the group to understand what we are talking about... > A scoped constraint includes both a shape and an indication of > how it is to be applied, e.g., all people must be people with at least two > friends would be a scoped constraint. I would actually prefer to use just > "constraint" for scoped constraints but I was trying not to push this > particular preference for the meaning of constraint. > I think it makes sense to indicate the difference between "Scoped" and "Unscoped" constraints...maybe, in my proposal I was suggesting that a Shape was composed of a set of constraints...which could also be called "Compound constraints", but I would prefer not to complicate the glossary... > peter > > > On 01/24/2015 08:08 AM, Karen Coyle wrote: > > > > > > On 1/23/15 10:34 PM, Jose Emilio Labra Gayo wrote: > >> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 8:30 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider > >> <pfpschneider@gmail.com <mailto:pfpschneider@gmail.com>> wrote: > >> > > The glossary already contains a stab as this: > >>> > >>> > https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/Glossary#Unscoped_Constraint.2FShape > > > >>> > > > >>> 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 > > > >> 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. > > > >> 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 > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- Saludos, Labra > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1 > > iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUw8z6AAoJECjN6+QThfjzx3oH/1ED2hwHUZX6C94Ph6MW19fM > IYMUu3vS+s4XwwtPFPkqnMG8BrwtyzYKolWX5Eocd2Q+X7dAJrJMdeHQIX/EmjIZ > 4kWFjh6fBsN8GzfDCy4qfUkVhGNf4Bzl/sKM3q2UbapNRX/VId96xSVPc/cC1jDL > h6nRktcRuQIQx9W4Jg457nO8S+34ny6yV7t6J0CRziIyw5n5L4XgEOULblp5/mMT > FmrDgoo7t++stZeP1HM8BSCgKmDr8dVDE9yS0+QggJU2GtpCpdrTxWqaA54rR38b > P2SJlrd1VLJDg69vOs+KKlqNcoX2CIjOvbidur6inqBc0Ki/2prn6YSokqkiku0= > =0HPS > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > -- Saludos, Labra
Received on Saturday, 24 January 2015 20:15:37 UTC