Re: Some ISSUE proposals for this week

Hi Holger,
Thanks for the input on the agenda.

Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com> wrote on 04/26/2016 05:33:21 PM:

> From: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
> To: "public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org" <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
> Date: 04/26/2016 05:34 PM
> Subject: Some ISSUE proposals for this week
> 
> Given that Peter has sent regrets for this week, maybe we should again 
> aim at uncontroversial topics.
> 
> ISSUE-126 and ISSUE-127 are outdated as both concepts have been replaced 

> in the new draft. Suggest CLOSE with no action.
> 
> ISSUE-132 can be closed: all core constraint definitions have been 
> generalized to work for all three possible cases.
> 
> ISSUE-123 and ISSUE-150 could be handled together. My proposal is to 
> drop sh:directType and merge sh:datatype and sh:class into sh:type as 
> outlined on the proposals wiki page. We should do such syntax changes 
> (if we do them) before the next round of publication.

I have to admit not to understand the relationship with ISSUE-150 which is 
about nested severities. Did you mean a different issue?

> 
> I also notice several high-level ISSUEs that may have outlived their 
> usefulness or may be outdated:
> - ISSUE-65 is too general and old to be actionable
> - ISSUE-111 was created while we discussed to what extent SHACL shall 
> cover UI properties such as sh:name. We decided to provide limited 
> support for these, but not much more, so maybe this ticket is no longer 
> needed?

I tend to agree but I've been keeping them as reminders. I think we could 
close those after we've had a review of the draft before publication - at 
least as far as ISSUE-65 is concerned.

> 
> Holger
> 
> 

--
Arnaud  Le Hors - Senior Technical Staff Member, Open Web Technologies - 
IBM Cloud