- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2015 11:12:56 -0700
- To: Arthur Ryman <arthur.ryman@gmail.com>
- CC: "public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org" <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Could you send the pointer to your well-founded semantics again? Putting a link on the WG Wiki page would also be helpful. peter On 06/11/2015 11:01 AM, Arthur Ryman wrote: > On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 7:52 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider > <pfpschneider@gmail.com> wrote: >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 >> >> Which limited forms of recursion do you mean? >> >> Where are these limited forms useful (and better than other >> approaches)? > > Peter, > > I mean that there is no need to require that sh:valueShape is acyclic. > This is form of recursion is useful (based on OSLC use cases) and has a > well-founded semantics which I spelled out recently. However, this means > that you cannot translate the shape into a single SPARQL query, but that > is not a requirement. > > -- Arthur > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJVec+oAAoJECjN6+QThfjz5WMIAIfixGKP/3SrMASCF6BwkyBN Eu6ygnfmZlVvjdPvwMiWTFsRgTm+A76WMHiClt/yDLcvGF9Uslcq0bXQqiv0xnvI iX3KHinwBxgQ9UwAV27LTu7tAYphL9K6fqgnpDYDT/LXiiCmHs9Ka3TRz8jJhM2g Yhcq4tTikAwr0VM9nDHkSagPDn5szvx31Qj3FpjkIb7dcO9yh9pBpiW1sullciKl XpT6pOc+oAihWFumtnvhO48UGnNFY1LOJBAioY2EAsEiXywaYAp16qiMee//VApU g0Q+cVah9VVwfSmKe8+Li7bB65g0Mx3Z7zg5L1pyIYZd+TIW3mnj1yDOWhfVNJU= =rzyz -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Thursday, 11 June 2015 18:13:27 UTC