Re: Pragmatic Proposal for the Structure of the SHACL Spec

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 03/20/2015 04:05 AM, Richard Cyganiak wrote:
> Arnaud,
> 
>> On 20 Mar 2015, at 00:05, Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>> 
>> the possible problem you're pointing out has to do with having
>> different people work independently rather than having multiple
>> documents. The same would be true if we had one document with various
>> sections independently edited by different people.
> 
> You’re hitting the nail on the head.
> 
> The problem is that this WG has different people working independently.

I don't see this as the current problem in the working group.

What I see as the current problem is that there is no agreement on how to
evaluate the work being done.  Some working group members believe that it is
better to build a core language with little or no work being done to
determine whether the core can be expanded to cover the rest of the working
group's requirements.  Other working group members believe that it is better
to build a full language and only later determine what should be in the
core.  Each of these sides does not view the issues put forward by the other
side as being important.

[...]

> Richard

peter

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVDAwnAAoJECjN6+QThfjzVXkH/2chkCaM3xfWxxdifyQAwTQD
AZPfTA0j6YAbbEL4VG++rPGU0p63GH1aqMXuIjCrHZ7ogNvaP6Vt0pOkyPfFEzlA
VP+A6KqNpQ3VrHZPvt2HaOCNqVc6fG/gMeS723cU0Il5CvL7hcaFRpbnMgaEK1eu
vxC0Me+yNKdX2ZyILW9SdpbZwLbkOdaCPxmd+BxIz4QRCghz8l0ekMu8Sh+FzCp8
MsUbEYRgV9yR9xVg6mJGLYIlS433U514qCRnIb5VJfZcIpB3Ro0+GkESYQ7c6UYW
C/N6LfmGSwGNbRsyMQ41C5AuB8wsGwhdyYLoCKn2hRTr6SchNE8WCkltraVCRGM=
=bqDd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Received on Friday, 20 March 2015 12:02:14 UTC