- From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2016 19:27:50 -0700
- To: public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org
On 7/27/16 4:42 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote: > The Abstract Syntax lags behind the path-vs-inverse property stuff. > > I also believe we have decided to use the term shapes graph instead of > "schema", so this should be aligned. > > In terms of the current resolutions, I believe the spec is up to date. > We are waiting for resolutions on ISSUE-133 (tomorrow) and then scope > syntax. > > Meanwhile I believe it might be easier to track the spec with a single > BNF-like document instead of having snippets of the syntax interwoven > with prose. Otherwise you are probably wasting a lot of time tracking > another changing document. I disagree. Readability is very important. - kc > > Holger > > > On 28/07/2016 1:42, Karen Coyle wrote: >> Eric and I have made the requested updates to the Abstract Syntax >> document:[1] >> - made clear that this is based on SHACL and is non-normative >> - added references (refresh, refresh, refresh until you see them) >> >> We need to coordinate this with SHACL, but I admit to being unclear >> what changes are "in progress" there, so perhaps Holger and Dimitris >> could give us an update on where they are with changes. For example, >> scopeNode is still listed in the editor's draft - will it be removed >> before the next working draft is issued? etc. Maybe what we need is >> what will be in/out for that next draft? >> >> Thanks, >> kc & ericP >> >> [1] http://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/shacl-abstract-syntax/ > > > -- Karen Coyle kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
Received on Thursday, 28 July 2016 02:28:21 UTC