- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 04:47:19 -0700
- To: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>, public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Thinking further on An alternative design would be to hard-code the sh:valueShape property into the engine, and do the recursion in the outer layer, outside of SPARQL. I don't see how it would work. peter On 03/19/2015 09:46 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote: > > > On 3/20/15 1:30 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 >> >> So you are saying that you can either do recursive shapes inside >> SPARQL, which requires an extension to SPARQL, or outside of SPARQL, >> which requires something more than SPARQL. OK, I'll change the wording >> to "It provides a formal specification for SHACL in terms of SPARQL >> plus something extra to handle recursive shapes." > > Yes the critical difference is that option 2 could still be executed > with off-the-shelf SPARQL processors. > > I would also be fine with the same solution that you have, and simply > disallow recursion at sh:valueShape. > > Thanks, Holger > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVDAjHAAoJECjN6+QThfjzj3gIAJOs8jHDN1NruSNt85meW4Mz ubqO0IojW0jHhrf2ATKKLkOR+KnMGQdx5PoP38UCWVFFkITQu2niMMOKl6LMtaoO zur7k1yyrdrAE5HnS1dBipIyN6WdAzMwvcaPCGozN36u1GZRpK9smmQx6rFZBOSu 0a81FZc3qUovPlNxkdRKDo+h/Dl/3D90E85hKgqSbnNLna0WYtY44iffZAp2boWj TrOr8HGXj6MwZMSJfdo9AqnzpHO7Kpkw952O3QJ1qwylDDYC2zRX/JrJ2l1nlb+g FpqXhnQYonFJdtdweVaPUpI2HP5cHgSSb+x4+Dh55tU7SaPSIdqPOT6+PJPm2ps= =VZ1w -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Friday, 20 March 2015 11:47:49 UTC