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

Re: Naming of cardinality properties

From: Michel Dumontier <michel.dumontier@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 23:20:16 -0700
Message-Id: <42B619D0-5AA2-4234-9785-CD832B13EFB0@gmail.com>
Cc: RDF Data Shapes Working Group <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
To: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
+1 on sh:minCount, sh:maxCount, and sh:count

m





> On Mar 26, 2015, at 11:05 PM, Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com> wrote:
> 
> 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 06:20:45 UTC

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