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

Re: SHACL semantics - any alternatives to SPARQL?

From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2015 12:29:16 -0700
Message-ID: <54FDF48C.8000204@kcoyle.net>
To: public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org


On 3/9/15 11:25 AM, Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote:
>> >- You completely removed the Template mechanism. However, template
>> >macros are an approved requirement [1]. Furthermore, nobody seems to
> I'd be very surprised if all the folks present at that vote understood
> that it would be used as evidence that we specifically need SPIN
> templates. At the time, I recall folks saying "well, perhaps ShEx is a
> 'template' language..." It seems likely that it would have met with
> objection had it explicitly read "SPIN templates".
>
>

The requirement states:

"The language should make it possible to encapsulate such recurring 
patterns in a parameterizable form."

We want the *capability*. I don't see how we can include anything 
specific in the primer before an actual language is developed and we see 
what templates might look like, although a placeholder indicating our 
intention might be a good idea. (I can only assume that since we haven't 
yet settled on a standard, the primer will be edited to conform before 
it is finalized.)

kc

-- 
Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
Received on Monday, 9 March 2015 19:29:45 UTC

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