- From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- Date: Fri, 29 May 2015 10:06:41 -0700
- To: public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org
My concern (which I voiced at the F2F where we took the vote) was the same as Ralph's -- it has a negative racial connotation to me, as well as just being dark. I've been ignoring the recent spate of sex bondage memes, so that one didn't occur to me. With usage, however, the word takes on a new meaning -- much like "ontology" or "resource" or "owl" ;-). kc On 5/28/15 7:33 PM, Ralph TQ [Gmail] wrote: > Dean, > > In the south of the US, in the last 200 or so years, ‘SHACL’ has other > negative connotations. We should consider what the full power of the > SHAPES work will be, beyond “Fifty Shades of Constraints” :-) > > Ralph > rhodgson@topquadrant.com <mailto:rhodgson@topquadrant.com> > > > > >> On May 28, 2015, at 10:27 PM, Dean Allemang >> <dallemang@workingontologist.com >> <mailto:dallemang@workingontologist.com>> wrote: >> >> I've been accused by many of having my mind in the gutter, but >> honestly, after a few months of reading emails about this, the sex >> shop connotation never occurred to. A quick informal poll of the >> people in my office yielded the comment that such a complain says more >> about the complainer than the name. >> >> While I like DASH a lot, I think we might let a sleeping dog lie. >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 12:20 PM, Simon Steyskal >> <simon.steyskal@wu.ac.at <mailto:simon.steyskal@wu.ac.at>> wrote: >> >> Hi! >> >> The people I talked to found it quite fitting (+ funny considering >> the various logo possibilities ;)). >> But ofc, they were mostly non-native English speakers. >> >> simon >> >> --- >> DDipl.-Ing. Simon Steyskal >> Institute for Information Business, WU Vienna >> >> www: http://www.steyskal.info/ twitter: @simonsteys >> >> Am 2015-05-29 03:41, schrieb Holger Knublauch: >> >> 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. >> >> Regards, >> Holger >> >> >> > -- Karen Coyle kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
Received on Friday, 29 May 2015 17:07:11 UTC