- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2015 16:02:10 -0700
- To: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>, RDF Data Shapes Working Group <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
I would say instead that the *most relevant* computer languages, e.g., SQL and SPARQL, do not work this way. I believe that most users of SHACL will not see that the connection to programming languages is so strong as to dictate how SHACL works. In general, users cannot tell which constraint is most restrictive. This is a job better done by the analog of query optimizers. Requiring a particular order of evaluation will inhibit such optimiizations. peter On 07/27/2015 05:27 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote: > ISSUE-76 [1] is about whether the order of AND and OR operands should matter. > I believe the order should matter, because this is how most computer languages > work and therefore matches the expectation that users can put the most > restrictive operands first to avoid unnecessary evaluations. It also helps > produce consistent results in the face of errors. sh:AndConstraint and > sh:OrConstraint use rdf:Lists for that reason. > > Holger > > [1] http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/76 >
Received on Tuesday, 28 July 2015 23:02:45 UTC