public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org from May 2015 by date

Sunday, 31 May 2015

• Re: shapes-ISSUE-60 (Other Extension Languages): Shall SHACL support other extension languages beside SPARQL (like JavaScript)? [SHACL Spec] Holger Knublauch
• a path towards implementing the way forward Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: shapes-ISSUE-60 (Other Extension Languages): Shall SHACL support other extension languages beside SPARQL (like JavaScript)? [SHACL Spec] Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• RE: shapes-ISSUE-60 (Other Extension Languages): Shall SHACL support other extension languages beside SPARQL (like JavaScript)? [SHACL Spec] Simon.Cox@csiro.au
• Re: shapes-ISSUE-60 (Other Extension Languages): Shall SHACL support other extension languages beside SPARQL (like JavaScript)? [SHACL Spec] Holger Knublauch

Saturday, 30 May 2015

• Re: update to SHACL-SPARQL Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: Comments about the Concepts in the SHACL Document Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: Comments about the Concepts in the SHACL Document Holger Knublauch
• Re: update to SHACL-SPARQL Holger Knublauch
• shapes-ISSUE-62 (General selection or filtering): Selection or filtering by arbitrary expressions and shapes [SHACL Spec] RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker
• shapes-ISSUE-61 (Direction of sh:nodeShape): Direction of individual scoping: sh:nodeShape vs. sh:individualScope [SHACL Spec] RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker
• Re: multiple value shape? Irene Polikoff
• Re: multiple value shape? Holger Knublauch
• shapes-ISSUE-60 (Other Extension Languages): Shall SHACL support other extension languages beside SPARQL (like JavaScript)? [SHACL Spec] RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker

Friday, 29 May 2015

• editing SHACL specification document or fragment Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Comments about the Concepts in the SHACL Document Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: SHACL name Irene Polikoff
• Re: SHACL name Karen Coyle
• Re: multiple value shape? Arnaud Le Hors
• Re: multiple value shape? Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: multiple value shape? Arnaud Le Hors
• Re: multiple value shape? Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: multiple value shape? Arnaud Le Hors
• Re: creating a formal definitions portion for the SHACL WD Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: multiple value shape? Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: multiple value shape? Eric Prud'hommeaux
• Re: multiple value shape? Eric Prud'hommeaux
• Re: creating a formal definitions portion for the SHACL WD Holger Knublauch
• Re: multiple value shape? Arnaud Le Hors
• Re: SHACL name Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: SHACL name Ralph TQ [Gmail]
• Co-Editor for SHACL Spec Simon Steyskal
• Re: SHACL name Dean Allemang
• Re: SHACL name Simon Steyskal
• SHACL name Holger Knublauch
• Re: multiple value shape? Holger Knublauch

Thursday, 28 May 2015

• RDF Data Shapes WG Minutes for 28 May 2015 Arnaud Le Hors
• Re: multiple value shape? Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• multiple value shape? Thomas Weber
• implementing today's resolution Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: shapes-ACTION-21: Arrange https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/facet_property_names to have a table of aspects of contraints (x) and coherent proposals (y) Ted Thibodeau Jr
• Re: Advanced notice of proposal to be made on our weekly call to move us forward Arthur Ryman
• Regrets for 2015-05-28 Arthur Ryman
• Regrets for 28-05 telco Dimitris Kontokostas

Wednesday, 27 May 2015

• RDF Data Shapes WG agenda for 28 May 2015 Arnaud Le Hors

Tuesday, 26 May 2015

• Advanced notice of proposal to be made on our weekly call to move us forward Arnaud Le Hors
• Re: Suggestions for test cases framework Karen Coyle
• Re: Suggestions for test cases framework Karen Coyle
• Re: Suggestions for test cases framework Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: Suggestions for test cases framework Holger Knublauch
• Re: Suggestions for test cases framework Jose Emilio Labra Gayo
• Re: Suggestions for test cases framework Holger Knublauch

Monday, 25 May 2015

• New user story: S46: Software regression testing with SHACL Dimitris Kontokostas
• Re: shapes-ISSUE-51 (Results Vocabulary): What types of validation results should be returned [SHACL Spec] Dimitris Kontokostas
• Re: Proposal for ISSUE-1 Holger Knublauch

Sunday, 24 May 2015

• Re: shapes-ISSUE-51 (Results Vocabulary): What types of validation results should be returned [SHACL Spec] Holger Knublauch
• Re: Recursion in RDF Data Shape Languages Holger Knublauch

Saturday, 23 May 2015

• Re: Recursion in RDF Data Shape Languages Arthur Ryman
• shapes-ISSUE-59 (labra): Cardinalities and default cardinalities [SHACL Spec] RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker
• shapes-ISSUE-58 (labra): Closed shapes [SHACL Spec] RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker
• shapes-ISSUE-57 (labra): Grouping of Shapes [SHACL Spec] RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker
• shapes-ISSUE-56 (labra): Inverse triple constraints [SHACL Spec] RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker
• shapes-ISSUE-55 (labra): Triple constraints [SHACL Spec] RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker
• shapes-ISSUE-54 (labra): Disjunction on shapes [SHACL Spec] RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker
• shapes-ISSUE-53 (labra): Conjunction of shapes [SHACL Spec] RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker
• shapes-ISSUE-52 (labra): Define an Abstract Syntax for SHACL [SHACL Spec] RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker

Friday, 22 May 2015

• Re: Recursion in RDF Data Shape Languages Holger Knublauch
• Re: Recursion in RDF Data Shape Languages Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: Proposal for ISSUE-1 Arthur Ryman
• Re: Recursion in RDF Data Shape Languages Arthur Ryman
• Re: shapes-ISSUE-50 (presentation requirements): Presentations to the working group Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: shapes-ISSUE-50 (presentation requirements): Presentations to the working group Arnaud Le Hors
• update to SHACL-SPARQL Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: good standing in W3C working groups Arnaud Le Hors
• good standing in W3C working groups Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: shapes-ISSUE-51 (Results Vocabulary): What types of validation results should be returned [SHACL Spec] Dimitris Kontokostas
• Re: shapes-ISSUE-50 (presentation requirements): Presentations to the working group Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: shapes-ISSUE-51 (Results Vocabulary): What types of validation results should be returned [SHACL Spec] Holger Knublauch
• Re: shapes-ISSUE-51 (Results Vocabulary): What types of validation results should be returned [SHACL Spec] Dimitris Kontokostas
• Re: shapes-ISSUE-51 (Results Vocabulary): What types of validation results should be returned [SHACL Spec] Holger Knublauch
• Re: shapes-ISSUE-51 (Results Vocabulary): What types of validation results should be returned [SHACL Spec] Dimitris Kontokostas
• Re: Suggestions for test cases framework Holger Knublauch
• Re: Suggestions for test cases framework Jose Emilio Labra Gayo
• shapes-ISSUE-51 (Results Vocabulary): What types of validation results should be returned [SHACL Spec] RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker
• Re: shapes-ISSUE-50 (presentation requirements): Presentations to the working group Arnaud Le Hors
• Suggestions for test cases framework Holger Knublauch

Thursday, 21 May 2015

• Re: Question on closed shapes Holger Knublauch
• Re: shapes-ISSUE-50 (presentation requirements): Presentations to the working group Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: ISSUE-3 how to specify the shape information and the data information Holger Knublauch
• Re: Proposal for ISSUE-1 Holger Knublauch
• Re: shapes-ISSUE-50 (presentation requirements): Presentations to the working group Holger Knublauch
• Re: shapes-ISSUE-50 (presentation requirements): Presentations to the working group Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• RDF Data Shapes WG Minutes for 21 May 2015 Arnaud Le Hors
• Re: shapes-ISSUE-50 (presentation requirements): Presentations to the working group Arnaud Le Hors
• Re: Recursion in RDF Data Shape Languages Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: ISSUE-3 how to specify the shape information and the data information Arthur Ryman
• Re: two points about presentations to the working group Arthur Ryman
• Re: Question on closed shapes Arthur Ryman
• Re: Recursion in RDF Data Shape Languages Arthur Ryman
• Profile/shapes discussion at public-lod Karen Coyle
• ISSUE-3 how to specify the shape information and the data information Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• S45: Linked Data Update via HTTP GET and PUT Arthur Ryman
• Re: Proposal for ISSUE-1 Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• shapes-ISSUE-50 (presentation requirements): Presentations to the working group RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker
• two points about presentations to the working group Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: ISSUE-1: Inferencing and current databases Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: Proposal for ISSUE-1 Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: ISSUE-1: Inferencing and current databases Dimitris Kontokostas
• Re: My proposal to move us forward Holger Knublauch
• Re: Recursion in RDF Data Shape Languages Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Added not, and, xor to my draft Holger Knublauch

Wednesday, 20 May 2015

• Proposal for ISSUE-1 Arthur Ryman
• tomorrow's access code: 640 696 335 Eric Prud'hommeaux
• RDF Data Shapes WG Minutes for 20 May 2015 Arnaud Le Hors
• Re: Recursion in RDF Data Shape Languages Arthur Ryman
• Re: Recursion in RDF Data Shape Languages Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• shapes-ACTION-26: Draft a proposal for issue-1 (with holger) RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker
• Re: My proposal to move us forward Iovka Boneva
• Re: My proposal to move us forward Arthur Ryman
• Recursion in RDF Data Shape Languages Arthur Ryman
• Re: question about http://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/semantics/ Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: availability Wednesday Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: Updated F2F agenda Iovka Boneva
• Re: question about http://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/semantics/ Iovka Boneva
• Re: availability Wednesday Irene Polikoff
• availability Wednesday Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• My proposal to move us forward Arnaud Le Hors
• RDF Data Shapes WG Minutes for 19 May 2015 Arnaud Le Hors

Tuesday, 19 May 2015

• RDF Data Shapes WG F2F4 Poll Arnaud Le Hors
• Updated F2F agenda Arnaud Le Hors
• question about http://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/semantics/ Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: telecon details for F2F Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: telecon details for F2F Eric Prud'hommeaux
• Re: telecon details for F2F Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: telecon details for F2F Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: telecon details for F2F Bart van Leeuwen
• Re: telecon details for F2F Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• shapes-ACTION-25: Announce a stable version of the semantics document so we can have a review cycle RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker
• Re: telecon details for F2F Bart van Leeuwen
• Re: telecon details for F2F Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: telecon details for F2F Eric Prud'hommeaux
• Re: telecon details for F2F Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: telecon details for F2F Arnaud Le Hors
• Re: telecon details for F2F Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: telecon details for F2F Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: telecon details for F2F Karen Coyle
• Re: telecon details for F2F Eric Prud'hommeaux
• Re: telecon details for F2F Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• telecon details for F2F Eric Prud'hommeaux
• Re: Invited experts? Holger Knublauch
• Re: One example Holger Knublauch
• Re: what is the ShEx proposal Holger Knublauch
• Re: Invited experts? Arnaud Le Hors
• Invited experts? Holger Knublauch

Monday, 18 May 2015

• Re: unannounced changes to http://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/semantics/ Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: unannounced changes to http://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/semantics/ Iovka Boneva
• Re: what is the ShEx proposal Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: what is the ShEx proposal Eric Prud'hommeaux
• draft presentation for VF2F Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: what is the ShEx proposal Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: what is the ShEx proposal Eric Prud'hommeaux
• what is the ShEx proposal Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• unannounced changes to http://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/semantics/ Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: One example Karen Coyle

Sunday, 17 May 2015

• Re: One example Holger Knublauch
• Re: One example Karen Coyle
• Re: One example Karen Coyle
• Re: One example Karen Coyle
• Re: One example Holger Knublauch

Saturday, 16 May 2015

• Re: One example Holger Knublauch
• Re: Updated F2F agenda Holger Knublauch
• One example Karen Coyle

Friday, 15 May 2015

• Updated F2F agenda Arnaud Le Hors
• Re: Fwd: Re: ISSUE-23: sh:ShapeClass? Holger Knublauch
• Re: Fwd: Re: ISSUE-23: sh:ShapeClass? Dimitris Kontokostas
• RDF Data Shapes WG Minutes for 14 May 2015 Arnaud Le Hors

Thursday, 14 May 2015

• Re: Fwd: Re: ISSUE-23: sh:ShapeClass? Holger Knublauch
• Re: shapes-ACTION-24: Write requirement coming from issue-48 Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• shapes-ACTION-24: Write requirement coming from issue-48 RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker
• RE: RDF Data Shapes WG agenda for 14 May 2015 Solbrig, Harold R.
• Re: RDF Data Shapes WG agenda for 14 May 2015 Richard Cyganiak
• Fwd: Re: ISSUE-23: sh:ShapeClass? Dimitris Kontokostas
• Re: ISSUE-23: sh:ShapeClass? Holger Knublauch
• Re: RDF Data Shapes WG agenda for 14 May 2015 Karen Coyle
• Re: RDF Data Shapes WG agenda for 14 May 2015 Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• RDF Data Shapes WG agenda for 14 May 2015 Arnaud Le Hors

Wednesday, 13 May 2015

• RDF Data Shapes WG Minutes for 7 May 2015 Arnaud Le Hors
• shapes-ISSUE-49 (Dimitris): Distinction between scoped and unscoped shapes [SHACL Spec] RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker

Tuesday, 12 May 2015

• Re: ISSUE-23: sh:ShapeClass? Holger Knublauch
• Re: ISSUE-23: sh:ShapeClass? Dimitris Kontokostas

Monday, 11 May 2015

• Re: ISSUE-23: sh:ShapeClass? Karen Coyle

Sunday, 10 May 2015

• Re: ISSUE-23: sh:ShapeClass? Holger Knublauch
• Re: ISSUE-23: sh:ShapeClass? Holger Knublauch

Friday, 8 May 2015

• Re: ISSUE-23: sh:ShapeClass? Dimitris Kontokostas
• Re: ISSUE-23: sh:ShapeClass? Karen Coyle
• Re: ISSUE-23: sh:ShapeClass? Dimitris Kontokostas

Thursday, 7 May 2015

• Re: Proposal c) Holger Knublauch
• Re: Question on closed shapes Holger Knublauch
• Re: Proposal c) Eric Prud'hommeaux
• Re: Question on closed shapes Arthur Ryman
• shapes-ACTION-23: Write up semantics (eq, ne, and any other constraint aspect) in the face of zero-or-more results to a property path RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker
• shapes-ACTION-22: Propose a "more compelling" use case for = and != for property paths (issue-41, issue-42) RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker
• shapes-ACTION-21: Arrange https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/facet_property_names to have a table of aspects of contraints (x) and coherent proposals (y) RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker
• Added two requirements for validating rdf:Lists; resolves ISSUE-46 Richard Cyganiak
• Re: ISSUE-23: A proposal to not mingle shapes and classes Arthur Ryman
• Re: preliminary analysis of shape expressions proposal Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: preliminary analysis of shape expressions proposal Iovka Boneva
• Re: Proposal c) Holger Knublauch
• Re: Proposal c) Eric Prud'hommeaux
• Re: Proposal c) Holger Knublauch

Wednesday, 6 May 2015

• Re: ISSUE-23: sh:ShapeClass? Holger Knublauch
• RDF Data Shapes WG agenda for 07 May 2015 Eric Prud'hommeaux
• Re: Question on closed shapes Karen Coyle
• Test instance data Karen Coyle
• Re: Proposal c) Eric Prud'hommeaux
• Re: preliminary analysis of shape expressions proposal Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: preliminary analysis of shape expressions proposal Peter F. Patel-Schneider

Tuesday, 5 May 2015

• Re: preliminary analysis of shape expressions proposal Iovka Boneva

Friday, 1 May 2015

• RDF Data Shapes WG minutes for 30 April 2015 Arnaud Le Hors
• preliminary analysis of shape expressions proposal Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Proposal c) Holger Knublauch

Last message date: Sunday, 31 May 2015 22:55:05 UTC