Re: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM)

• From: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
• Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 09:55:33 +1000
• To: RDF Data Shapes Working Group <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
• Message-ID: <54CAC875.9020808@topquadrant.com>

On 1/30/2015 2:08, Arthur Ryman wrote:
> In OSLC Resource Shapes, there are several ways to associate shapes 
> with nodes: oslc:instanceShape, oslc:resourceShape, oslc:valueShape. 

Yes, and in the original LDOM proposal the equivalent of 
oslc:instanceShape was rdf:type, and oslc:valueShape has been 
identically reused as ldom:valueShape. oslc:resourceShape appears to be 
specific to your platform, but the new language should of course leave 
other ways of specifying that linkage open.

BTW wouldn't it have been better to use "oslc:shape" instead of 
"oslc:instanceShape", because you don't really talk about "instances" 
(of classes)?

Holger

Received on Thursday, 29 January 2015 23:56:08 UTC