- From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2016 21:36:56 -0700
- To: public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org
On 11/2/16 5:20 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote: > > > On 3/11/2016 0:48, Karen Coyle wrote: >> As decided at the meeting: >> >> On 10/28/16 9:39 AM, Karen Coyle wrote: >>> *QUESTION 1: What does it mean for a target to be "processed" as a >>> value? It's the term "processed" here that is problematic. Perhaps an >>> example would help, and then we could tweak the language. >> >> Proposed: The target of a shape that is the value of another shape >> MUST be ignored. > > This isn't correct. This would also mean that target must be ignored here: > > ex:PersonShape > sh:property [ > sh:predicate ex:address ; > sh:shape ex:AddressShape ; > ] . > > ex:AddressShape > sh:targetClass ex:Address . > > I have tried to explain before that this is a matter of context, and it > only is ignored at validation time, not always. The spec has to define that context, and so far it doesn't. Please show an example of a target that would be ignored, and I will try to find appropriate wording. kc > >> >> (Alternate: The target *in* a shape... - I'm not sure what language we >> are using for the various components of shapes. It could be "The >> target that is a component of a shape ..." Any of those would be ok >> with me as long as we are consistent.) >> >>> >>> *QUESTION 2: Does "are" here mean "MUST"? (This is a question throughout >>> the document, actually, wherever "are" is used in this way. Perhaps we >>> can decide once for all.) >> >> >> Yes, MUST must be used here. > > I have switched to MUST. > > https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/commit/06cd60457ec3448d7ca578c4aa3df324bea846f0 > > > Could we close this ticket now? > > Holger > > > -- Karen Coyle kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
Received on Thursday, 3 November 2016 04:37:31 UTC