- From: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
- Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2015 08:28:48 +1000
- To: public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org
On 3/2/2015 14:44, Karen Coyle wrote: > All of that assumes that other execution languages are possible. If > they are not, then we should give up the facade of being "execution > language neutral." I believe it's important to maintain flexibility because we cannot anticipate how and where SHACL will be used in the future. In TopBraid we already support JavaScript embedding in SPIN functions. I would not be surprised if SHACL gets picked up by some people in conjunction with JSON-LD, and some sort of JavaScript API may emerge out of this that is perhaps easier to execute on clients against vanilla JSON objects. And that could make it into a self-contained add-on deliverable of a future SHACL WG, similar to a potential XPath-based add-on. Likewise, I expect 3rd party template libraries to emerge, perhaps custom-tailored for popular ontologies such as schema.org. It will be useful if people can add executable bodies in multiple languages to those de-facto standard libraries. Yet for SHACL 1.0, I agree with Peter that SPARQL is *inevitable*. Instead of regarding SPARQL as a necessary evil, I am however certainly embracing it as an opportunity. Holger
Received on Monday, 2 March 2015 22:29:57 UTC