- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2016 14:05:19 -0700
- To: public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org
I spent some time last week turning over rocks in the SPARQL specification to see what's underneath them. I found a lot of ugly stuff there, particularly related to EXISTS. It is even the case that different SPARQL impleentations diverge on the behaviour of EXISTS. This matters to SHACL in two ways. First, EXISTS is used in the definitions of many SHACL core constraint components. I don't know if any of these uses of EXISTS hit any problems, but I don't think that I have found all the problems with EXISTS. Even if the core constraint components don't hit any problems, EXISTS is going to be important for extension constraint components and these could easily hit problems with EXISTS. Second, SHACL pre-binding is defined in a way very similar to the way that EXISTS is defined so it is entirely possible that the definition of pre-binding has problems. Pre-binding is central to the definition of SHACL and central to the extension mechanism in SHACL so its definition is going to have be examined extremely closely. This all is in addition to the problems in the definition of pre-binding that I have already pointed out. Peter F. Patel-Schneider Nuance Communications
Received on Sunday, 19 June 2016 21:05:49 UTC