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

Re: [Editorial] Moving section 5 into section 3.3?

From: Dimitris Kontokostas <kontokostas@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>
Date: Mon, 16 May 2016 09:28:42 +0300
Message-ID: <CA+u4+a1SGF+jy+JQng--u4ueS1f4biw0oQG7O1obZiRPNi7rAQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
Cc: "public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org" <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
I am in favor of this change


On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 5:29 AM, Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>

> Dimitris, others,
> wouldn't it from a logical point of view make most sense to move the
> content of section 5 (Results Vocabulary) into 3.3 (which is currently
> empty)? Providing details of the validation results will help with the
> definition of the individual constraint components, where we already
> explain details of which fields of the validation results must be produced
> under which conditions. It avoids forward references. I remember we
> discussed this issue before and some people preferred to put the result
> vocabulary to a later stage because it is less relevant than the library of
> core components, but then we are not producing a tutorial here but a formal
> spec. Giving a beginner's introduction to SHACL is not the goal of this
> document (and we would fail miserably no matter how hard we tried).
> Thanks,
> Holger

Dimitris Kontokostas
Department of Computer Science, University of Leipzig & DBpedia Association
Projects: http://dbpedia.org, http://rdfunit.aksw.org,
Homepage: http://aksw.org/DimitrisKontokostas
Research Group: AKSW/KILT http://aksw.org/Groups/KILT
Received on Monday, 16 May 2016 06:29:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:30:33 UTC