- From: Irene Polikoff <irene@topquadrant.com>
- Date: Fri, 08 Jul 2016 12:10:09 -0400
- To: <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>, <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
>From https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/#section-rdf-graph: "The set of nodes of an RDF graph is the set of subjects and objects of triples in the graph. It is possible for a predicate IRI to also occur as a node in the same graph.² Irene On 7/8/16, 11:56 AM, "Karen Coyle" <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote: >"Any node in the data graph that is equal to/the same as/matches (pick >one) the value of sh:nodescope in the SHACL graph is 'in scope'." > >That said, the RDF Concepts document[1] describes a triple as two nodes >(" node-arc-node "). Therefore "node" does not include the predicate of >a triple. Could someone confirm that is the case? > >kc >[1] https://www.w3.org/TR/2014/REC-rdf11-concepts-20140225/ > >On 7/8/16 8:11 AM, Arnaud Le Hors wrote: >> Ok, but this isn't just a matter of hiding this when SPARQL is hidden. I >> still want to understand what that sentence means when SPARQL isn't >> hiddene. So, can you tell me what this sentence is supposed to be >>saying? >> >> A node scope with value $scopeNode, defines $scopeNode as the node >> in-scope in the data graph. >> >> The way it reads to me is that a node scope has a variable $scopeNode as >> a value, and that this defines the variable as the "node in-scope". What >> does it mean for a scope node to have a value? And How does a node scope >> with a value define the value as the "node in-scope"? And shouldn't that >> rather be "node in scope"?? >> >> As I said I just can't parse this sentence. I'd appreciate if someone >> could rephrase. >> >> Unfortunately the spec remains hard to read and understand because of >> stuff like this so I second the sentiment Karen conveys from the >> community she represents. I understand English isn't the editors' >> primary language and that's ok but given that I strongly encourage them >> to welcome comments pointing these problems out. >> >> Thanks. >> -- >> Arnaud Le Hors - Senior Technical Staff Member, Open Web Technologies - >> IBM Cloud >> >> >> >> >> From: Dimitris Kontokostas >><kontokostas@informatik.uni-leipzig.de> >> To: Arnaud Le Hors/Cupertino/IBM@IBMUS >> Cc: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>, public-data-shapes-wg >> <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org> >> Date: 07/08/2016 01:38 AM >> Subject: Re: $variables >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> >> >> You are right, >> although the button exists we the spec does not flow well in some cases >> when the sparql definitions are hidden >> Holger created an issue to track this and we will try to have it ready >> for review by the next call >> >> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 8:09 AM, Arnaud Le Hors <_lehors@us.ibm.com_ >> <mailto:lehors@us.ibm.com>> wrote: >> I have to agree with Karen. In fact, I will admit that I don't >> understand what this sentence means: >> >> A node scope with value $scopeNode, defines $scopeNode as the node >> in-scope in the data graph. >> >> Actually, I can't even quite parse this sentence. What's with that >> comma? What's the subject of "defines"? >> >> I do understand the following: >> >> Node scopes are defined with the sh:scopeNode predicate. The values of >> sh:scopeNode can be a IRIs or literals. >> >> Although the "a" seems to be a typo. >> -- >> Arnaud Le Hors - Senior Technical Staff Member, Open Web Technologies - >> IBM Cloud >> >> >> Karen Coyle <_kcoyle@kcoyle.net_ <mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net>> wrote on >> 07/07/2016 08:52:00 PM: >> >>> From: Karen Coyle <_kcoyle@kcoyle.net_ <mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net>> >>> To: _public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org_ >>><mailto:public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org> >>> Date: 07/07/2016 08:53 PM >>> Subject: Re: $variables >> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 7/7/16 4:59 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote: >>> > >>> > >>> > On 8/07/2016 9:45, Karen Coyle wrote: >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> On 7/7/16 3:42 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 8/07/2016 8:35, Karen Coyle wrote: >>> >>>> On the call today I was told that the way to avoid the >> complication of >>> >>>> the $variables in the spec is to choose not to view the SPARQL in >>>the >>> >>>> draft. However, even with the SPARQL hidden, the $variables are >>>still >>> >>>> visible since they are part of the explanatory text. So this does >>>not >>> >>>> solve the problem, and in fact it probably makes it worse because >>> >>>> without the SPARQL the $variables make even less sense. For >>>example, >>> >>>> with SPARQL definitions hidden, you see: >>> >>>> >>> >>>> ********** >>> >>>> >>> >>>> 2.1.1 Node scopes (sh:scopeNode) >>> >>>> >>> >>>> A node scope with value $scopeNode, defines $scopeNode as the node >>> >>>> in-scope in the data graph. >>> >>>> >>> >>>> Node scopes are defined with the sh:scopeNode predicate. The >> values of >>> >>>> sh:scopeNode can be a IRIs or literals. >>> >>>> >>> >>>> ************* >>> >>>> >>> >>>> I think they need to be removed from the text, and moved into the >>> >>>> SPARQL code area, and the text should be complete without using >>>them. >>> >>> >>> >>> That would be fine with me. I had used the values in SPARQL-like $ >>> >>> notation to make it easier to read for those who are familiar with >>> >>> SPARQL because the SPARQL query and its description would match. >> But if >>> >>> the WG thinks this is too geeky, we can just drop the $ sign and >> change >>> >>> the CSS style around these variables. >>> >>> >>> >>> I do wonder what audience are we talking about here? What in >> particular >>> >>> is difficult to understand about the $ variables? The spec is not a >>> >>> tutorial... >>> >>> >>> >>> Holger >>> >> >>> >> Holger, you always trot out this "not a tutorial" like anyone who >>>has >>> >> any problem with the spec is some kind of backward dunce. I wish you >>> >> would be less condescending and more open to hearing suggestions. >>>The >>> >> folks who brought this up are key RDF programmers on projects like >>> >> Europeana and DPLA. Hardly novices. But believe them when they say >>> >> that it makes the reading and comprehension more difficult. Do not >>> >> disparage them. >>> > >>> > The suggested change here is to drop the $ character before variable >>> > names in the scope section. I am really surprised this would make a >>> > difference, but said I have no problems with that. >>> >>> I'm pretty sure it isn't just a matter of dropping the $ - it doesn't >>> make sense to say: >>> >>> "A node scope with value scopeNode, defines scopeNode as the node >>> in-scope in the data graph." >>> >>> So some more adjustment of the text is going to be needed. Especially >>> because there is sometimes more about SPARQL in the text, such as: >>> >>> ********* >>> 2.1.1 Node scopes (sh:scopeNode) >>> >>> A node scope with value $scopeNode, defines $scopeNode as the node >>> in-scope in the data graph. >>> >>> Node scopes are defined with the sh:scopeNode predicate. The values of >>> sh:scopeNode can be a IRIs or literals. >>> >>> The following SPARQL query specifies the semantics of node scopes. The >>> variable $scopeNode is assumed to be pre-bound to the given value of >>> sh:scopeNode. >>> >>> ******* >>> >>> It doesn't make sense to say "The following SPARQL query...." when the >>> SPARQL query is hidden. >>> >>> If we can agree on parameters of the edits, I'd be happy to pitch in a >>> do some or all of the work. I'd say that the last paragraph belongs >>>with >>> the SPARQL code, and the first sentence needs a different value >>>example, >>> which should be uniform throughout where possible. >>> >>> I'd also reverse the first two paragraphs, which I think increases >>> readability. >>> >>> kc >>> >>> > >>> > What else would be needed to make the document more readable for the >>> > audience you are referring to? >>> > >>> > Anyway, I think you are over-reacting in your personal criticism. I >>>am >>> > merely collecting information to help me fulfill my editing role. If >>>I >>> > were to accept every single viewpoint without asking for >>>clarifications >>> > we would never reach a fixpoint - there are just too many different >>> > viewpoints and potential audiences here. >>> > >>> > Holger >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> >>> -- >>> Karen Coyle >>> _kcoyle@kcoyle.net_ <mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net>_http://kcoyle.net_ >> <http://kcoyle.net/> >>> m: 1-510-435-8234 >>> skype: kcoylenet/_+1-510-984-3600_ <tel:%2B1-510-984-3600> >>> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Dimitris Kontokostas >> Department of Computer Science, University of Leipzig & DBpedia >>Association >> Projects: _http://dbpedia.org_ <http://dbpedia.org/>, >> _http://rdfunit.aksw.org_ <http://rdfunit.aksw.org/>, >> _http://aligned-project.eu_ <http://aligned-project.eu/> >> Homepage: _http://aksw.org/DimitrisKontokostas_ >> Research Group: AKSW/KILT _http://aksw.org/Groups/KILT_ >> >> >> > >-- >Karen Coyle >kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net >m: 1-510-435-8234 >skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600 >
Received on Friday, 8 July 2016 16:10:44 UTC