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

Re: The NoSPARQL use case

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2015 07:06:52 -0800
Message-ID: <54F47C8C.2050500@gmail.com>
To: Jose Emilio Labra Gayo <jelabra@gmail.com>, Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
CC: Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>, "public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org" <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

If there are requirements that go beyond SPARQL then the working group is
going to have to provide a specification for them that is acceptable to the
working group and evidence of implementability of the specification.

I don't think that this has been done for recursive shape recognition.

peter




On 03/01/2015 01:19 PM, Jose Emilio Labra Gayo wrote:

[...]

> One you have identified the language constructs you have to implement
> them. SPARQL by itself is not enough as it doesn't handle, for example,
> recursion so there is a need for something else.

[...]


> -- -- Jose Labra

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJU9HyMAAoJECjN6+QThfjzKYkH/1pbPB9/ctOq7/wNg8Q5V17C
H7y5i5ZzS2EgaydkerdkJprY5urObQ/yaF/qPI6sc/CCm3x7bgF/FiBYoN7aThNm
lUvKs6d9QcJuL0AgxaWTlop2HSCEKYTS0stZvtMuWDoahBHbyGNOxCB1BLYOha8V
6r+HyWM2OyrLTypKr/1B2ZacIJmT6wj+/rCfK72xmzLKjxHlgols4JmG16SPwHoy
RNjXmjoZVqLy+C4iqDnlJCDNNjqwTYdIub5t7fWUPlEqX/ekLBCErLk3EaFbJP4X
XINHKmj+AMXmbmKOVwf677+Qcc3T3zEK9WBXMp2mP3X+QySZOgty8Fz8Psm7qYc=
=80ax
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Monday, 2 March 2015 15:07:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:30:17 UTC