Re: Core or Lite?

On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 11:41 PM, Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
wrote:

> This is on terminology for the high-level language consisting of the
> built-ins such as sh:minCount and sh:property (current section 2-6 in "my"
> spec).
>
> I believe there have been several proposals on how to call this, and we
> should pick a single term and use it consistently. Proposals that I have
> seen are
>
> 1) SHACL Core
> 2) the SHACL Core Profile (short: SHACL Core)
> 3) SHACL Lite

This may be a topic for yet another straw poll, but I wanted to enumerate
> all options before we do that. Are there any other options?


High-level language has also been used.


> My own order of preference would be 2 > 3 > 1, because there will be other
> profiles in the future (including sub-sets of Core). What I like about Lite
> is that it signals that this is just part of a larger "full" language.
>

My preference is to postpone the identification of the different profiles
until we know what is the main "SHACL language". For me, the SHACL language
should contain the most useful constructs and some extensibility mechanism.
I would not oppose to have also some kind of macro-facility also.

Once there is a full-language defined, it is possible to identify different
profiles and assign names to them.

Best regards, Jose Labra


> Thanks,
> Holger
>
>
>


-- 
-- Jose Labra