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

Re: Pragmatic Proposal for the Structure of the SHACL Spec

From: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2015 09:10:46 +1000
Message-ID: <550F4BF6.5010102@topquadrant.com>
To: public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org
On 3/20/2015 22:01, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> -----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.

If deterministic evaluation criteria would be applied, then what about 
checking which proposal has best coverage of the requirements (and thus 
User Stories)?

Holger

>    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.
Received on Sunday, 22 March 2015 23:11:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:30:18 UTC