SHACL name

Sorry to raise a dead topic, but I am increasingly getting negative 
feedback on the name SHACL from people outside of the WG. I know most of 
us were all excited about the name and were happy to have this difficult 
topic off the radar, but I am afraid it may come back. The feedback that 
I am hearing is that people don't take a technology serious that sounds 
like a sex toy, or that it sounds too dark. It's probably also a bit 
negative to talk only about constraining things, when it's really also a 
schema language to create things. I personally would now prefer 
something like "Data Shapes Language" (DASH), also because we then have 
prefix and technology abbreviation aligned (dash:property etc).

Did others hear similar feedback? Would this topic be worth reopening or 
shall we await feedback on the FPWD? I am fully aware we have many other 
topics to worry about right now, so please don't shoot the messenger.


Received on Friday, 29 May 2015 01:43:56 UTC