- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2015 12:27:27 -0700
- To: RDF Data Shapes Working Group <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 If the extension mechanism is shoved into a dusty corner then it matters a lot what is in core/lite. If, however, SHACL includes a construct that can express lots of things that is truly part of SHACL, then it matters a lot less what is in core/lite. If SHACL includes a construct to define new high-level constructs then what is in core/lite is pretty much a matter of taste. peter On 03/28/2015 01:16 PM, RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: > shapes-ISSUE-25 (core/lite): What's in Core/Lite? [SHACL Spec] > > http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/25 > > Raised by: Richard Cyganiak On product: SHACL Spec > > Assuming that SHACL includes an extension mechanism that can be used to > express pretty much anything, which constructs will be in the high-level > Core/Lite part of the language that can be used without the extension > mechanism? > > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVGaOfAAoJECjN6+QThfjzmYsH/167vkA7bx7IkXvOkmWrfl76 lm3EPRKYXBSWdI1KRu2DpoLc/4sv2PQlI1bmXeqaA9n58DhqSulfppuWBK6825BY SsRyNPsaZUap9p5TCQAL8lyj6frV9XM9dWh/b9Ccv7ygwQUpU4q/qOqOEYh4e8UL Ah1ZDrN+0d39xfFLr4O4EdeLEEJ1OMnjAVAIGQxNI3XptNtP79UchtOan1scKfGX 3YfShJZnxuZMvUdKNwFUuSAU7E0J/nSJfzavpA6n3EvTRGDaFuDrAhdAZB1X/hjz ErWw+HGiQLQP+DUf0/a8g2x6NlshgYt3U2k5cpdRVgx8Hjr76w+dQLMZWHBEcPE= =d+xT -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Monday, 30 March 2015 19:28:00 UTC