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

Re: ISSUE-166: Suggestion to close without action

From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2016 17:32:41 -0700
To: public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <66755995-cbf3-b0da-5945-cadbca45c8ee@kcoyle.net>
The extension mechanism should be separate from the core because there 
is no one extension mechanism required - we have agreed that one can 
extend using SPARQL but one can also extend using other technologies. 
The inter-dependency of the core on the extension is therefore not only 
not required but would violate the design requirements.


On 7/6/16 4:12 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote:
> The proposal in ISSUE-166 is to split the spec into two documents -
> factoring out the advanced parts. We have discussed this at length many
> times and my view point has not changed. There are lots of benefits of
> having a single consistent document with the ability to cross-link
> between sections (e.g. the SPARQL definitions of the core constraint
> components require details that would otherwise have to be duplicated
> from the advanced sections). Anyone who is only interested in the Core
> language can stop reading after the first part.
> PROPOSAL: Close ISSUE-166 without action.
> Holger

Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
Received on Thursday, 7 July 2016 00:33:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:30:36 UTC