- From: tombaker via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2019 16:13:36 +0000
- To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
I understand the second of [Karen's two diagrams](https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/769#issuecomment-469287460) above but not the first. I think we addressed this point [on the list](https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dxwg-comments/2019Feb/0001.html). Is the first diagram an accurate representation of the model in the current PWD? > but if you want to axiomitise the shape of that graph - for example require that the format of each artifact is declared, you need a subject of the axiom. RDFS Class, SHACL NodeShape with a targetClass, etc. @rob-metalinkage Are you saying that a graph node must have an explicit or inferred `rdf:type` statement to be the focus of a shape? In ShEx it would not. (I'm not sure about SHACL.) But if artifacts are important, couldn't a class be coined? This thread is quite long so my comments are based just on the most recent posts; apologies if I'm misreading the issue. -- GitHub Notification of comment by tombaker Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/769#issuecomment-470169602 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 6 March 2019 16:13:37 UTC