public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org from January 2015 by date

Friday, 30 January 2015

• RDF Data Shapes WG Minutes for 29 January 2015 Arnaud Le Hors
• RDF Data Shapes WG Minutes for 22 January 2015 Arnaud Le Hors
• Re: Definition of Shape Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: Definition of Shape Jose Emilio Labra Gayo
• Re: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Holger Knublauch

Thursday, 29 January 2015

• Re: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Holger Knublauch
• RE: shapes and classes: different Arthur Ryman
• S35 status Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: example of recursive shapes Arthur Ryman
• Re: On LDOM Eric Prud'hommeaux
• Re: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Arthur Ryman
• Re: introducing CONSTRAINTS Arthur Ryman
• Re: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Arthur Ryman
• Re: Definition of Shape Arthur Ryman
• Re: ISSUE-5 Definition of Resource Karen Coyle
• Re: Fwd: Re: Added Requirement: Static Constraints Arthur Ryman
• Re: shapes-ISSUE-19 (S35 not RDF): S35 appeals to something that is not RDF Arthur Ryman
• Re: ISSUE-5 Definition of Resource Arthur Ryman
• Re: ACTION-7 Resource Shapes Arthur Ryman
• Re: shapes-ISSUE-18 (S35 examples): S35 needs to state what constraints are required Arthur Ryman
• Re: RDF Data Shapes WG agenda for 29 January 2015 Jose Emilio Labra Gayo
• Re: RDF Data Shapes WG agenda for 29 January 2015 Jose Emilio Labra Gayo
• Re: On LDOM Holger Knublauch
• Re: RDF Data Shapes WG agenda for 29 January 2015 Karen Coyle
• Re: On LDOM Karen Coyle
• Re: RDF Data Shapes WG agenda for 29 January 2015 Arnaud Le Hors
• Re: On LDOM Peter F. Patel-Schneider

Wednesday, 28 January 2015

• Re: On LDOM Holger Knublauch
• Re: RDF Data Shapes WG agenda for 29 January 2015 Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• RDF Data Shapes WG agenda for 29 January 2015 Arnaud Le Hors
• Re: On LDOM Karen Coyle
• Re: On LDOM Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: F2F wiki page (was Re: regrets for F2F2 physical presence) Arnaud Le Hors
• Re: On LDOM Karen Coyle
• Re: On LDOM Eric Prud'hommeaux
• On LDOM Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: Language or technology Holger Knublauch
• Re: Language or technology Jose Emilio Labra Gayo
• LDOM algorithm (very early draft) Holger Knublauch

Tuesday, 27 January 2015

• RE: shapes and classes: different Irene Polikoff
• Re: shapes and classes: different Holger Knublauch
• Re: F2F wiki page (was Re: regrets for F2F2 physical presence) Holger Knublauch
• Re: Language or technology Holger Knublauch
• Re: shapes and classes: different Eric Prud'hommeaux
• F2F wiki page (was Re: regrets for F2F2 physical presence) Arnaud Le Hors
• Re: shapes and classes: different Holger Knublauch
• Re: Bob is not a shape [Was: Re: Shapes are Classes, even if you don't use rdf:type] Holger Knublauch
• RE: shapes and classes: different Eric Prud'hommeaux
• Re: Bob is not a shape [Was: Re: Shapes are Classes, even if you don't use rdf:type] Karen Coyle
• Re: Language or technology Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: Language or technology Irene Polikoff
• Re: github repo organization Simon Steyskal
• Re: Language or technology Jose Emilio Labra Gayo
• Re: github repo organization Holger Knublauch
• Re: Language or technology Holger Knublauch
• Re: Language or technology Jose Emilio Labra Gayo
• Re: Language or technology Holger Knublauch
• Language or technology Jose Emilio Labra Gayo
• Re: shapes and classes: different Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: Shapes are Classes, even if you don't use rdf:type Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: Bob is not a shape [Was: Re: Shapes are Classes, even if you don't use rdf:type] Holger Knublauch
• How we can all "win" the Classes vs Shapes war Holger Knublauch
• RE: shapes and classes: different Irene Polikoff
• Re: Shapes are Classes, even if you don't use rdf:type Holger Knublauch

Monday, 26 January 2015

• Re: Bob is not a shape [Was: Re: Shapes are Classes, even if you don't use rdf:type] Holger Knublauch
• Re: The Data Portal use cases Holger Knublauch
• Re: shapes and classes: different Holger Knublauch
• RE: shapes and classes: different Irene Polikoff
• RE: shapes and classes: different Irene Polikoff
• Re: shapes and classes: different Eric Prud'hommeaux
• Re: shapes and classes: different Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• RE: shapes and classes: different Irene Polikoff
• Re: shapes and classes: different Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• RE: shapes and classes: different Irene Polikoff
• Re: Shapes are Classes, even if you don't use rdf:type Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: shapes and classes: different Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• RE: shapes and classes: different Irene Polikoff
• Re: shapes and classes: different Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: shapes and classes: different Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: Bob is not a shape [Was: Re: Shapes are Classes, even if you don't use rdf:type] Irene Polikoff
• Re: shapes and classes: different Irene Polikoff
• Re: shapes and classes: different Jerven Tjalling Bolleman
• shapes and classes: different Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: Bob is not a shape [Was: Re: Shapes are Classes, even if you don't use rdf:type] Eric Prud'hommeaux
• Re: Bob is not a shape [Was: Re: Shapes are Classes, even if you don't use rdf:type] Jerven Tjalling Bolleman
• Re: Bob is not a shape [Was: Re: Shapes are Classes, even if you don't use rdf:type] Eric Prud'hommeaux
• Re: Bob is not a shape [Was: Re: Shapes are Classes, even if you don't use rdf:type] Jerven Tjalling Bolleman
• Bob is not a shape [Was: Re: Shapes are Classes, even if you don't use rdf:type] Eric Prud'hommeaux
• Re: The Data Portal use cases (was: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM)) Jose Emilio Labra Gayo
• Re: Shapes are Classes, even if you don't use rdf:type Dimitris Kontokostas
• Re: Shapes are Classes, even if you don't use rdf:type Jerven Tjalling Bolleman
• Re: Shapes are Classes, even if you don't use rdf:type Holger Knublauch
• Re: Shapes are Classes, even if you don't use rdf:type Dimitris Kontokostas
• Re: Shapes are Classes, even if you don't use rdf:type Holger Knublauch
• Re: Shapes are Classes, even if you don't use rdf:type Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: what is LDOM? (was Re: example of recursive shapes) Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: github repo organization Holger Knublauch

Sunday, 25 January 2015

• Re: Shapes are Classes, even if you don't use rdf:type Holger Knublauch
• Re: Shapes are Classes, even if you don't use rdf:type Holger Knublauch
• Re: Property groups and Combinations Holger Knublauch
• Re: what is LDOM? (was Re: example of recursive shapes) Holger Knublauch
• Re: Property groups and Combinations Irene Polikoff
• Re: Property groups and Combinations Jose Emilio Labra Gayo
• Re: Shapes are Classes, even if you don't use rdf:type Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• what is LDOM? (was Re: example of recursive shapes) Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Shapes are Classes, even if you don't use rdf:type Jerven Bolleman
• The Data Portal use cases (was: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM)) Holger Knublauch
• Re: Property groups and Combinations Holger Knublauch
• Re: Validation entry points Holger Knublauch
• Re: Validation entry points (was: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM)) Dimitris Kontokostas
• Re: Property groups and Combinations Jose Emilio Labra Gayo
• Validation entry points (was: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM)) Holger Knublauch
• Re: example of recursive shapes Holger Knublauch
• Re: example of recursive shapes Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: example of recursive shapes Holger Knublauch
• New LDOM version 0.1.5 Holger Knublauch
• Re: example of recursive shapes Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Holger Knublauch
• Re: example of recursive shapes Holger Knublauch

Saturday, 24 January 2015

• Re: Definition of Shape Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: regrets for F2F2 physical presence Eric Prud'hommeaux
• Re: Definition of Shape Jose Emilio Labra Gayo
• Re: Definition of Shape Jose Emilio Labra Gayo
• regrets for F2F2 physical presence Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• example of recursive shapes Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: Definition of Shape Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: Definition of Shape Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: Definition of Shape Karen Coyle
• Re: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Eric Prud'hommeaux
• Re: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Dimitris Kontokostas
• Re: Property groups and Combinations Holger Knublauch
• RE: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Eric Prud'hommeaux
• Interlinked shapes (was: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM)) Antonio David Perez Morales
• Re: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Jose Emilio Labra Gayo
• Re: Property groups and Combinations (was: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM)) Jose Emilio Labra Gayo
• Re: Interlinked shapes (was: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM)) Jose Emilio Labra Gayo
• Re: Unbounded repetitions (was: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM)) Jose Emilio Labra Gayo
• Re: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Holger Knublauch
• Unbounded repetitions (was: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM)) Holger Knublauch
• Property groups and Combinations (was: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM)) Holger Knublauch
• Interlinked shapes (was: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM)) Holger Knublauch
• Re: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Jose Emilio Labra Gayo
• RE: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Irene Polikoff
• Re: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Holger Knublauch
• Re: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Holger Knublauch
• Re: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Jose Emilio Labra Gayo
• Re: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Jose Emilio Labra Gayo
• Re: Definition of Shape Jose Emilio Labra Gayo
• RE: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Irene Polikoff
• Re: Definition of Shape Jose Emilio Labra Gayo
• Re: Definition of Shape Holger Knublauch
• Re: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Holger Knublauch
• Re: Definition of Shape Jose Emilio Labra Gayo
• Re: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Jose Emilio Labra Gayo
• Re: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Holger Knublauch
• Re: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Jose Emilio Labra Gayo
• RE: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Irene Polikoff
• Re: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Jose Emilio Labra Gayo
• Re: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Holger Knublauch

Friday, 23 January 2015

• Re: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Holger Knublauch
• Re: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Karen Coyle
• Re: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Holger Knublauch
• Re: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Holger Knublauch
• Re: Definition of Shape Holger Knublauch
• introducing CONSTRAINTS Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Karen Coyle
• Re: Definition of Shape Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• summary of LDOM Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Definition of Shape Jose Emilio Labra Gayo
• New User Story: Validating and describing linked data portals Jose Emilio Labra Gayo
• Re: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Holger Knublauch
• Re: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Dimitris Kontokostas
• Re: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Holger Knublauch
• Re: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Dimitris Kontokostas
• Re: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Eric Prud'hommeaux
• Re: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Dimitris Kontokostas
• Re: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Holger Knublauch
• Re: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Eric Prud'hommeaux
• Re: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Dimitris Kontokostas
• New requirement: separation of structural from complex constraints Jose Emilio Labra Gayo
• Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM) Holger Knublauch

Thursday, 22 January 2015

• Technology Name Holger Knublauch
• Re: Existing Systems page Holger Knublauch
• ISSUE-20 is solved Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Existing Systems page Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: ACTION-7 Resource Shapes Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: Fwd: Re: Added Requirement: Static Constraints Holger Knublauch
• Re: RDF Data Shapes WG agenda for 22 January 2015 Holger Knublauch
• Re: Fwd: Re: Added Requirement: Static Constraints Karen Coyle
• Re: Fwd: Re: Added Requirement: Static Constraints Jose Emilio Labra Gayo
• Re: ACTION-7 Resource Shapes Arthur Ryman
• Re: Fwd: Re: Added Requirement: Static Constraints Karen Coyle
• Re: RDF Data Shapes WG agenda for 22 January 2015 Arnaud Le Hors
• Re: Fwd: Re: Added Requirement: Static Constraints Holger Knublauch
• Re: RDF Data Shapes WG agenda for 22 January 2015 Holger Knublauch
• Re: Fwd: Re: Added Requirement: Static Constraints Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Fwd: Re: Added Requirement: Static Constraints Karen Coyle

Wednesday, 21 January 2015

• RDF Data Shapes WG agenda for 22 January 2015 Arnaud Le Hors

Tuesday, 20 January 2015

• Re: github repo organization Eric Prud'hommeaux
• Re: github repo organization Simon Steyskal
• Re: github repo organization Eric Prud'hommeaux
• Re: github repo organization Simon Steyskal
• github repo organization Eric Prud'hommeaux
• Introducing LDOM Holger Knublauch

Monday, 19 January 2015

• RDF Data Shapes WG Minutes for 15 January 2015 Arnaud Le Hors

Friday, 16 January 2015

• Re: Versioning (Repository?) for WG Drafts Antonio David Perez Morales
• Re: AW: Re: Versioning (Repository?) for WG Drafts Simon Steyskal
• Re: AW: Re: Versioning (Repository?) for WG Drafts Eric Prud'hommeaux
• Versioning (Repository?) for WG Drafts Antonio David Perez Morales
• Re: Added Requirement: Static Constraints Holger Knublauch
• Re: Added Requirement: Static Constraints Karen Coyle

Thursday, 15 January 2015

• Re: Added Requirement: Static Constraints Holger Knublauch
• ISSUE-18 S35 still not in good shape - constraints Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: AW: Re: Versioning (Repository?) for WG Drafts Arnaud Le Hors
• Re: ACTION-7 Resource Shapes Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: Added Requirement: Static Constraints Karen Coyle
• ACTION-7 Resource Shapes Arthur Ryman
• Re: shapes-ACTION-8: Write up rdfunit processing Dimitris Kontokostas
• Re: shapes-ACTION-8: Write up rdfunit processing Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: shapes-ISSUE-11 (S9 impossible): S9 is about existing but unspecified values Peter F. Patel-Schneider

Wednesday, 14 January 2015

• RDF Data Shapes WG agenda for 15 January 2015 Arnaud Le Hors

Tuesday, 13 January 2015

• Re: shapes-ACTION-8: Write up rdfunit processing Dimitris Kontokostas

Monday, 12 January 2015

• Re: Added requirements for node type Holger Knublauch

Sunday, 11 January 2015

• Added Requirement: Static Constraints Holger Knublauch
• Re: Use Cases vs. User Stories Simon Steyskal
• Re: Use Cases vs. User Stories Irene Polikoff
• RE: Use Cases vs. User Stories Simon Steyskal

Saturday, 10 January 2015

• Re: ISSUE-5 Definition of Resource Karen Coyle
• Re: Added requirements for node type Simon Steyskal

Friday, 9 January 2015

• Re: Terminology: How to call "IRI or blank node"? Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: shapes-ISSUE-11 (S9 impossible): S9 is about existing but unspecified values Dean Allemang
• RE: Terminology: How to call "IRI or blank node"? Irene Polikoff
• RDF Data Shapes WG Minutes for 8 January 2015 Arnaud Le Hors
• Re: Terminology: How to call "IRI or blank node"? Holger Knublauch
• Re: Terminology: How to call "IRI or blank node"? Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Added requirements for node type Holger Knublauch
• Re: Terminology: How to call "IRI or blank node"? Holger Knublauch
• Re: User Stories wiki editing conflicts Eric Prud'hommeaux
• AW: Re: Versioning (Repository?) for WG Drafts Simon Steyskal
• RE: Use Cases vs. User Stories Irene Polikoff
• Re: shapes as classes Arthur Ryman
• Use Cases vs. User Stories Simon Steyskal
• Re: Versioning (Repository?) for WG Drafts Axel Polleres
• Re: Versioning (Repository?) for WG Drafts Axel Polleres
• Versioning (Repository?) for WG Drafts Simon Steyskal
• Re: User Stories wiki editing conflicts Holger Knublauch
• Re: User Stories wiki editing conflicts Eric Prud'hommeaux
• Re: shapes-ISSUE-19 (S35 not RDF): S35 appeals to something that is not RDF Eric Prud'hommeaux
• Re: User Stories wiki editing conflicts Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: issue status Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: User Stories wiki editing conflicts Eric Prud'hommeaux
• Re: issue status Eric Prud'hommeaux
• Re: Terminology: How to call "IRI or blank node"? Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: shapes-ISSUE-19 (S35 not RDF): S35 appeals to something that is not RDF Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: User Stories wiki editing conflicts Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• issue status Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: Terminology: How to call "IRI or blank node"? Holger Knublauch
• Re: shapes-ISSUE-18 (S35 examples): S35 needs to state what constraints are required Peter F. Patel-Schneider

Thursday, 8 January 2015

• Re: shapes as classes Arthur Ryman
• User Stories wiki editing conflicts Holger Knublauch
• Re: ISSUE-5 Definition of Resource Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: shapes-ISSUE-18 (S35 examples): S35 needs to state what constraints are required Holger Knublauch
• Re: ISSUE-5 Definition of Resource Arthur Ryman
• Re: shapes-ACTION-9: Create wiki page for existing systems Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• shapes-ACTION-9: Create wiki page for existing systems RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker
• Re: shapes-ISSUE-18 (S35 examples): S35 needs to state what constraints are required Arthur Ryman
• S18: Scope of Export Eric Prud'hommeaux
• Re: shapes-ISSUE-19 (S35 not RDF): S35 appeals to something that is not RDF Arthur Ryman
• shapes-ACTION-8: Write up rdfunit processing RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker
• shapes-ACTION-7: For resource shapes RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker
• shapes-ACTION-6: And karen will be the editors. they will develop the document by ?? RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker
• apologies Johnston, Patrick - Hoboken
• Update on Dublin Core progress Karen Coyle
• Introduction Antonio David Perez Morales
• Introduction Jose Emilio Labra Gayo

Wednesday, 7 January 2015

• Data Shapes WG Agenda for 8 January 2015 Arnaud Le Hors

Monday, 5 January 2015

• Re: Terminology: How to call "IRI or blank node"? Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: Terminology: How to call "IRI or blank node"? Johnston, Patrick - Hoboken
• Re: Terminology: How to call "IRI or blank node"? Holger Knublauch

Sunday, 4 January 2015

• Re: Terminology: How to call "IRI or blank node"? Peter F. Patel-Schneider

Saturday, 3 January 2015

• Re: Terminology: How to call "IRI or blank node"? Karen Coyle

Friday, 2 January 2015

• Re: Terminology: How to call "IRI or blank node"? Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: Terminology: How to call "IRI or blank node"? Peter F. Patel-Schneider

Last message date: Friday, 30 January 2015 21:22:45 UTC