public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org from February 2016 by date

Monday, 29 February 2016

• Re: SHACL implementation on RDFUnit Dimitris Kontokostas

Sunday, 28 February 2016

• Re: SHACL implementation on RDFUnit Holger Knublauch
• shapes-ISSUE-123 (DirectType syntax): Shall we unify the syntax of sh:directType and sh:class? [SHACL - Core] RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker

Saturday, 27 February 2016

• Re: SHACL syntax and metamodel complexity Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: SHACL syntax and metamodel complexity Karen Coyle
• Re: SHACL implementation on RDFUnit Dimitris Kontokostas

Friday, 26 February 2016

• RDF Data Shapes WG Minutes for 25 February 2016 Arnaud Le Hors
• SHACL implementation on RDFUnit Dimitris Kontokostas
• Re: Filter handling on the metamodel Dimitris Kontokostas
• Re: ISSUE-95: New proposal for metamodel Holger Knublauch

Thursday, 25 February 2016

• Re: Filter handling on the metamodel Holger Knublauch
• Filter handling on the metamodel Dimitris Kontokostas
• RDF Data Shapes WG Agenda for 25 February 2015 Arnaud Le Hors

Wednesday, 24 February 2016

• Re: SHACL syntax and metamodel complexity Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: SHACL syntax and metamodel complexity Karen Coyle
• SHACL syntax and metamodel complexity Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: ACTION-29 Recursion: Wrap Up Jim Amsden
• Re: ACTION-29 Recursion: Wrap Up Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: ACTION-29 Recursion: Wrap Up Holger Knublauch
• ACTION-32: Formal Specification Arthur Ryman
• ACTION-29 Recursion: Wrap Up Arthur Ryman
• Re: shapes-ACTION-35: Proposal for lists (ISSUE-99 and ISSUE-119) Holger Knublauch
• Re: ISSUE-95: New proposal for metamodel Holger Knublauch
• Re: ISSUE-95: New proposal for metamodel Arthur Ryman

Tuesday, 23 February 2016

• Re: ISSUE-95: New proposal for metamodel Irene Polikoff
• Re: ISSUE-95: New proposal for metamodel Karen Coyle
• Re: ISSUE-95: New proposal for metamodel Arnaud Le Hors
• Re: ISSUE-95: New proposal for metamodel Arthur Ryman
• ISSUE-95: New proposal for metamodel Holger Knublauch

Sunday, 21 February 2016

• Re: RDF Data Shapes WG Minutes for 18 February 2016 Arthur Ryman

Friday, 19 February 2016

• Re: shapes-ACTION-35: Proposal for lists (ISSUE-99 and ISSUE-119) Holger Knublauch
• Re: shapes-ACTION-35: Proposal for lists (ISSUE-99 and ISSUE-119) Dimitris Kontokostas
• Re: shapes-ACTION-35: Proposal for lists (ISSUE-99 and ISSUE-119) Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: shapes-ACTION-35: Proposal for lists (ISSUE-99 and ISSUE-119) Holger Knublauch
• Re: shapes-ACTION-35: Proposal for lists (ISSUE-99 and ISSUE-119) Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• ISSUE-105: Updated proposals Holger Knublauch
• Re: shapes-ACTION-35: Proposal for lists (ISSUE-99 and ISSUE-119) Holger Knublauch

Thursday, 18 February 2016

• Re: shapes-ACTION-35: Proposal for lists (ISSUE-99 and ISSUE-119) Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• RDF Data Shapes WG Minutes for 18 February 2016 Arnaud Le Hors
• shapes-ACTION-35: Proposal for lists RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker
• Re: RDF Data Shapes WG agenda for 18 February 2016 Eric Prud'hommeaux
• Re: RDF Data Shapes WG agenda for 18 February 2016 Holger Knublauch
• Re: ISSUE-92 sh:partition added to the spec. Arthur Ryman

Wednesday, 17 February 2016

• Re: RDF Data Shapes WG agenda for 18 February 2016 Arnaud Le Hors
• Re: RDF Data Shapes WG agenda for 18 February 2016 Holger Knublauch
• RDF Data Shapes WG agenda for 18 February 2016 Arnaud Le Hors

Tuesday, 16 February 2016

• Re: shapes-ISSUE-122 (no-shapes-file): Should we postpone publishing a SHACL shapes file (indefinitely)? [SHACL Spec] Jim Amsden

Monday, 15 February 2016

• Re: shapes-ISSUE-122 (no-shapes-file): Should we postpone publishing a SHACL shapes file (indefinitely)? [SHACL Spec] Holger Knublauch
• Re: ISSUE-92 sh:partition added to the spec. Holger Knublauch
• Re: shapes-ISSUE-122 (no-shapes-file): Should we postpone publishing a SHACL shapes file (indefinitely)? [SHACL Spec] Arthur Ryman

Friday, 12 February 2016

• ISSUE-47: New proposal Holger Knublauch
• Re: ISSUE-92 sh:partition added to the spec. Holger Knublauch

Thursday, 11 February 2016

• RDF Data Shapes WG Minutes for 11 February 2016 Arnaud Le Hors
• Comments on commenting Karen Coyle
• Re: Summarizing results of yesterday's call Arthur Ryman
• Re: ISSUE-92 sh:partition added to the spec. Arthur Ryman
• Summarizing results of yesterday's call Simon Steyskal
• Re: ISSUE-92 sh:partition added to the spec. Iovka Boneva
• ISSUE-92 sh:partition added to the spec. Arthur Ryman
• Re: ISSUE-95 Discussions Holger Knublauch

Wednesday, 10 February 2016

• shapes-ISSUE-122 (no-shapes-file): Should we postpone publishing a SHACL shapes file (indefinitely)? [SHACL Spec] RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker
• Re: RDF Data Shapes WG agenda for 11 February 2016 Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• RDF Data Shapes WG agenda for 11 February 2016 Arnaud Le Hors

Tuesday, 9 February 2016

• Re: ISSUE-95 Discussions Arthur Ryman

Monday, 8 February 2016

• Europeana tests of SHACL Karen Coyle

Sunday, 7 February 2016

• Re: ISSUE-95: Proposal 1 Done. Invitation for telecon. Arthur Ryman
• Re: AW: Re: ISSUE-95: Proposal 1 Done. Invitation for telecon. Arthur Ryman

Saturday, 6 February 2016

• RDF Data Shapes WG Minutes for 4 February 2016 Arnaud Le Hors

Friday, 5 February 2016

• Re: ISSUE-95: Proposal 1 Done. Invitation for telecon. Karen Coyle

Thursday, 4 February 2016

• Re: AW: Re: ISSUE-95: Proposal 1 Done. Invitation for telecon. Holger Knublauch
• Re: ISSUE-95 Discussions Holger Knublauch
• shapes-ISSUE-121 (# in graph name): Should the SHACL owl:Ontology include the # character [SHACL Spec] RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker
• AW: Re: ISSUE-95: Proposal 1 Done. Invitation for telecon. Simon Steyskal
• Re: ISSUE-95: Proposal 1 Done. Invitation for telecon. Holger Knublauch
• ISSUE-95: Proposal 1 Done. Invitation for telecon. Arthur Ryman
• SHACL test traits seeded with ShEx traits Eric Prud'hommeaux
• Re: RDF Data Shapes WG Agenda for 4 February 2016 Ted Thibodeau Jr
• Re: ISSUE-95: What should go into which Turtle file? Arthur Ryman
• Re: Any update on ISSUE-92? Arthur Ryman
• Re: ISSUE-95 Discussions Arthur Ryman
• Re: 3rd UCR WD published! Arthur Ryman
• Re: RDF Data Shapes WG Agenda for 4 February 2016 Holger Knublauch

Wednesday, 3 February 2016

• RDF Data Shapes WG Agenda for 4 February 2016 Arnaud Le Hors

Last message date: Monday, 29 February 2016 07:09:52 UTC