Re: ISSUE-95: New proposal for metamodel

Arnaud,

As Holger stated, we have not converged on a design. In order to break
the deadlock, we need input from the working group. My proposal is
[1], which is very minimalistic. If you can fit this into the agenda
this week, I'd be happy to also walk though my proposal.

[1] https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/ISSUE-95:_Metamodel_simplifications#Proposal_1

-- Arthur

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 11:38 PM, Holger Knublauch
<holger@topquadrant.com> wrote:
> After quite some off-list discussions, here is a new proposal for the
> metamodel:
>
> https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/ISSUE-95:_Metamodel_simplifications#Proposal_3
>
> I believe this proposal addresses most of the concerns and inefficiencies
> (e.g. verbose AbstractXY classes) and was produced as a result of
> discussions between Arthur, Simon and myself. However, I do not claim that
> all details of this proposal reflect their current view points. I welcome
> anyone's input on what aspects are not acceptable yet.
>
> Arnaud, I would be happy to explain this design to the group in the next
> call.
>
> Thanks,
> Holger
>
>

Received on Tuesday, 23 February 2016 18:51:10 UTC