- From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 09:10:10 -0700
- To: Irene Polikoff <irene@topquadrant.com>, public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org
Right, thanks Irene. I'm going to go through these mails and see what questions still need to be answered. kc On 10/26/16 6:52 AM, Irene Polikoff wrote: > sh:filterShape is a property, so its type is rdf:Property > > Itıs range of values are instances of sh:Shape > > sh:filterShape > rdf:type rdf:Property ; > rdfs:domain sh:Constraint ; > rdfs:range sh:Shape ; > > > > > Irene > > > On 10/26/16, 8:58 AM, "Karen Coyle" <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote: > >>>> >>>> Note that the first sentence of filter shape (2.2) says that the >>>> filter shape is a shape: "A filter is a shape in the shapes graph that >>>> further refines the focus nodes in the data graph that are validated >>>> against a constraint or all the constraints of a shape." >>> >>> Hmm well, that's formal language - I don't see a mistake but it's not >>> very readable. This is the general conflict that we have as editors: >>> some people tell us they want it more formal and others tell us they >>> want it more readable. It's not always possible to have both. If in >>> doubt, I am afraid I'll have to stick with the formal language and leave >>> the rest to other material. I welcome diffs with better prose. >>> >> >> It's not the language that is the problem - it's that it says that a >> filter is a shape, which I read as >> sh:filterShape rdf:type sh:Shape >> >> while the RDF says: >> >> sh:filterShape rdf:type sh:Constraint > > > -- Karen Coyle kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
Received on Friday, 28 October 2016 16:11:04 UTC