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

Re: Selected problems with Proposal 4

From: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2016 06:35:25 +1000
To: public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <56E1DA8D.50306@topquadrant.com>

On 11/03/2016 1:55, Karen Coyle wrote:
> On 3/10/16 3:10 AM, Holger Knublauch wrote:
>> 1) Proposal 4 is poorly motivated. As Peter stated himself, he started
>> this effort to simplify the metamodel. He made changes to the end-user
>> visible syntax in order to "simplify" the metamodel. However, there was
>> no problem with the end-user visible syntax to begin with. There was no
>> need to change it, and the new syntax is a step backwards. The metamodel
>> is far less important than the user-facing syntax.
> Simplifing the model is a valid motivation. Otherwise we wouldn't have 
> suggested to have a ShEx user interface. As that interface may not be 
> forthcoming, it would be preferable to have SHACL be easily 
> understandable. Otherwise it can only be easily used with a UI on top 
> of it, and that limits its use to those who have access to an 
> application with an interface. I think that would be the death of SHACL.


But can you explain what your paragraph has to do with mine?

Received on Thursday, 10 March 2016 20:36:00 UTC

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