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

shapes-ISSUE-163 ("constraining"): should "constraining" and other forms of "constraint" be used less in the specification [SHACL Spec]

From: RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 19 May 2016 19:56:42 +0000
To: public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1b3U3m-0004qQ-Qo@maia.w3.org>
shapes-ISSUE-163 ("constraining"): should "constraining" and other forms of "constraint" be used less in the specification [SHACL Spec]

http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/163

Raised by: Peter Patel-Schneider
On product: SHACL Spec

Both internal and external reviews of the SHACL specification have indicated
that they have problems with the use of the word "constraining".   One
option is to dramatically reduce the use of the various forms of
"constraint" in the spec.

See 
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-shapes/2016May/0000.html
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-shapes/2016May/0004.html
Received on Thursday, 19 May 2016 19:56:45 UTC

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