- From: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
- Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2016 11:02:41 +1000
- To: public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org
On 18/10/2016 3:21, markh wrote: > regarding: > "The spec uses different terminology from RDF where it is using > concepts from RDF. For example, the SHACL spec uses "resource" where > RDF uses "node"." > > > the term 'node' is explicitly referenced in > http://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/shacl/#terminology > > I have collated candidate locations for replacing 'resource' with node: > https://github.com/marqh/data-shapes/pull/1 > > There are places where 'resource' is used in contrast to 'node' in the > same sentence, suggesting explicit difference in meaning, e.g. > https://github.com/marqh/data-shapes/pull/1/files#diff-69303a57193e6c2d7327c8de0fc977caL3156 > > which may require further thought > > I have not replaced any RDF, only usage within the text. > > I have not updated uses of the term > 'validation result resource' > as this does not seem like a 'node' to me. > Is 'resource' being used in an explanatory way here, rather than a > specific reference? > > If so, then there are no uses of 'resource' requiring a definition > under 1.1 Terminology > > > > I suggest that: > - any of the candidate locations which are suitable > replacement get replaced > - I can submit a PR for these and remove any ones which cause > problems > - a definition of 'resource' is added to > http://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/shacl/#terminology > - if it is deemed to be a term requiring definition. TBC based on > PR feedback > > Does this seem a sensible course of action to take? Thanks again for your pull request. I have accepted your changes in: https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/compare/afaaeee264...a8269811e8 and removed the remaining usages of the term "resource". This means we don't need to define the term. Again, if this has been a response to external feedback, it would be helpful to have a reference so that we can "tick it off". Holger > > > thank you > mark > > > > On Tue, 27 Sep 2016 13:57:13 +0000 > RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> > wrote: > >> shapes-ACTION-43: Take a read through the spec and raise specific >> terminology issues as needed >> >> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/actions/43 >> >> Assigned to: Mark Hedley >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
Received on Tuesday, 18 October 2016 01:03:15 UTC