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

Re: Property groups and Combinations

From: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 08:52:57 +1000
Message-ID: <54C573C9.2020209@topquadrant.com>
To: RDF Data Shapes Working Group <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
On 1/26/2015 2:07, Jose Emilio Labra Gayo wrote:
> And really, from my point of view, SPIN (or LDOM) and ShEx should not 
> be confronted when they could be complementary. It would be much more 
> fruitful if we concentrated our efforts


> You also argument that SPIN was designed 7 years ago, and what? I 
> think we should concentrate on what is the best solution to solve a 
> given problem, rather than constantly checking if some technology that 
> I have fits or not in a solution.

Yes, and SPIN was designed to address pretty much exactly the use cases 
of this WG, even if that design happened 7 years ago.

> With regards to the research papers, they described what Shape 
> Expressions are and how they could be used to describe and validate 
> linked data portals. They didn't pretend to compare technologies. We 
> are currently working on a future paper were we could compare 
> different technologies but that's work in progress...

I am aware of one such paper already:


For example table 2 or table 3 clearly indicate that SPIN has larger 
coverage than ShEx.

We agree that we need a merged approach. LDOM covers all of SPIN and 
almost all of ShEx. There is probably oslc:instanceShape missing, and we 
need to figure out what to do with it. We may be 90% there. Restarting 
the process with ShEx would take us back to 50% coverage, because you'd 
need to add the features of SPIN back in. As Irene states, in the 
interest of making progress this doesn't sound like a step in the right 

I hope we can move on in the same boat.

Received on Sunday, 25 January 2015 22:56:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Sunday, 25 January 2015 22:56:29 UTC