- From: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
- Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2015 16:05:52 +1000
- To: RDF Data Shapes Working Group <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
Another question on the vocabulary. Does anyone object to using sh:minCount, sh:maxCount? If so, what would be the alternatives? I personally find sh:minCardinality too long, and sh:minCard too unclear. Shall we support sh:count as a short-cut for the case where min/maxCount are equal? The main use case of that would be sh:count = 1, and this is quite a common case. On the downside, it adds a bit complexity to the engines as there are multiple ways to state the same thing. Thanks Holger
Received on Friday, 27 March 2015 06:07:06 UTC