Re: How would option b) on the last straw poll of 12 March work?

Hi Arnaud, all,

On 3/13/2015 14:26, Arnaud Le Hors wrote:
> You could maybe reorganize your document so that all references to 
> SPARQL are moved to a later section as I think Jose suggested at some 
> point.

Thanks for the constructive suggestion. I have tried to implement this 
separation in the new version of the spec:

     http://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/shacl/

There is now a clearer division between the high-level vocabulary 
(called SHACL Core Profile, section 2 - 6) and the more complex features 
(section 7 onwards). Implementers may decide to only read the upper half 
of the spec and should get enough information out of that. I have tried 
hard to move all SPARQL references into sections 7 onwards.

The document is of course far from perfect yet - I have created red TODO 
items and ISSUEs on open topics. Please don't drill into details yet so 
that we can at least agree on the big picture.

I hope this addresses the main concerns and allows the WG to have a more 
fruitful collaboration from now on.

Thanks,
Holger