- From: Pano Maria <pano.maria@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 08:41:31 +0100
- To: RDF Data Shapes Working Group <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
Hi Holger, > Thanks a lot, Pano! Looks great so far. I will look deeper into this, but some quick feedback: Thanks! > > - sh:focusNode and sh:targetNode can both carry either resources or literals. So I am afraid we cannot assume they are "@id" typed. Note that sh:focusNode is never entered directly but always machine-generated, so we don't need to worry about it, yet for sh:targetNode we need to keep it general. OK, I'll remedy this. > > - Is it worth/possible to limit sh:minCount and the other xsd:integer properties to xsd:integer, so that either "1" or 1 can be used? Yes, the current style is limited. I'll add those as well. > > - handling of sh:sourceConstraint is correct although it's never entered by a user. In that case, should we take it out of the @context? Is it ever returned as a property of a validation result? > > - Language maps look great for values that actually have a language, yet if this means that the syntax becomes inconsistent for those values that are plain xsd:strings, then I'd rather not use them. At this stage it's unclear how many people will use i18n values there anyway. Those that do can still add the @language tag for their local use. Having said this, further down you show how to use an alias ("pathList"), so maybe we could use "name" for sh:name and "names" for the lingual values? Exactly, the inconsistence is problematic. My current thinking is to keep it out, since it might be confusing to have both sh:name and sh:names. We could add some examples of potentially useful @context constructs, for those interested. On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 5:36 AM, Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com> wrote: > Thanks a lot, Pano! Looks great so far. I will look deeper into this, but > some quick feedback: > > - sh:focusNode and sh:targetNode can both carry either resources or > literals. So I am afraid we cannot assume they are "@id" typed. Note that > sh:focusNode is never entered directly but always machine-generated, so we > don't need to worry about it, yet for sh:targetNode we need to keep it > general. > > - Is it worth/possible to limit sh:minCount and the other xsd:integer > properties to xsd:integer, so that either "1" or 1 can be used? > > - handling of sh:sourceConstraint is correct although it's never entered by > a user. > > - Language maps look great for values that actually have a language, yet if > this means that the syntax becomes inconsistent for those values that are > plain xsd:strings, then I'd rather not use them. At this stage it's unclear > how many people will use i18n values there anyway. Those that do can still > add the @language tag for their local use. Having said this, further down > you show how to use an alias ("pathList"), so maybe we could use "name" for > sh:name and "names" for the lingual values? > > Holger > > > > > > On 7/03/2017 19:52, Pano Maria wrote: >> >> I submitted a PR (https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/pull/30) with a >> json-ld @context draft, including some examples. If time permits, we >> could discuss it Wednesday. >> >> Kind regards, >> Pano >> >> On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 3:02 PM, RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue >> Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote: >>> >>> shapes-ACTION-48: Produce a json-ld @context draft >>> >>> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/actions/48 >>> >>> Assigned to: Simon Steyskal >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> > >
Received on Thursday, 9 March 2017 07:42:25 UTC