- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2016 14:49:17 -0800
- To: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>, public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org
I don't think that this is a discriminator between the various proposals, except perhaps for the special casing of blank nodes in the SHACL syntax. A special set of shapes that produce informational messages for constructions that might be mistaken is as much a "lint" tool as any other similar tool. peter On 03/04/2016 04:49 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote: > In Proposal 3, SHACL itself can be used to check for well-formed SHACL models, > because the ConstraintType and Parameter declarations can be used as shapes. > No need for hard-coding that magic into UIs or "lint" tools. > > For example, this allows anyone to state that the values of sh:minCount must > be xsd:integer. But also, constraints such as "there SHOULD only be one > sh:minCount on the same property at the same shape" can be produced as a > sh:Warning. Many of these are easy to formalize, and I anticipate that the > SHACL community will contribute all kinds of such metashapes in the future. > > Holger >
Received on Tuesday, 8 March 2016 22:49:53 UTC