- From: Irene Polikoff <irene@topquadrant.com>
- Date: Mon, 16 May 2016 10:57:11 -0400
- To: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
- Cc: public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org
Yes. I think I re-read it at least 5 or 6 times and head to ask questions before I understood it. It is too complex for the intro example. Irene Sent from my iPhone > On May 16, 2016, at 3:33 AM, Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com> wrote: > >> On 16/05/2016 8:04, Karen Coyle wrote: >> It's not just that it has no scope - it is a particular kind of shape, a shape-based constraint component, and probably shouldn't be in that first example at all. > > Each time I am re-reading the spec I stumble across the complexity of this very first example. Is this supposed to: > a) serve as a human-readable starting point > b) show off some cool features (that motivate SHACL) > c) provide a walk-through of key features? > > I suggest we select a much simpler example - something like validating instances of schema:Person and just a single shape. > > There will be plenty of other examples in other documents (tutorials and primers) in the future. Not our job. > > Thoughts? > > Holger > >
Received on Monday, 16 May 2016 14:57:41 UTC