W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org > January 2016

Re: ISSUE-22 and ISSUE-23

From: Arthur Ryman <arthur.ryman@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 07:06:53 -0500
Message-ID: <CAApBiOmtKzuPbp0wX4RGubxZFK0xDvzNn39BBLfPcgrnHdRVZA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
Cc: "public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org" <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
Peter,

I've revised the text for ISSUE-23 as per the WG telecon discussion.

-- Arthur

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 1:53 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider
<pfpschneider@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 01/20/2016 05:53 AM, Arthur Ryman wrote:
>> For ISSUE-23 read the paragraphs following:
>> ISSUE 23: Classes and/or Shapes
>> The remainder of this section is not agreed upon within the SHACL
>> Working Group. The proposed text was discussed in the WG telecon dated
>> 2016-01-14.
>
> This appears to mean that the only classes that SHACL recognizes are ones in
> the shapes graph.  Is this supposed to be the case uniformly throughout SHACL?
>  The wording is also unique "subclass ... via rdfs:subClassOf".  I do not
> think that this is defined.
>
>> For ISSUE-22 read the text following:
>> A shape may refer to itself directly or indirectly via sh:valueShape,
>> sh:filterShape, etc
>
> This looks better.
>
> peter
>
>
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 1:39 AM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider
>> <pfpschneider@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> A concise description of where to look for changes would be useful.
>>>
>>> peter
>>>
>>>
>>> On 01/19/2016 11:30 AM, Arthur Ryman wrote:
>>>> I've updated the spec. Please review.
>>>>
>>>> -- Arthur
>>>>
Received on Friday, 22 January 2016 12:07:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:30:29 UTC