- From: Tomasz Pluskiewicz via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 23 May 2020 19:54:33 +0000
- To: public-hydra-logs@w3.org
Shoot, you're right. We already have changed the range and in fact also use `rangeIncludes` 👌 I was again misled by the discrepancy between the JSON-LD and HTML 🤦‍♂️. We should work on having them synchronised. That said, I would still propose to add `hydra:expects schema:rangeIncludes sh:Shape`. This way we would explicitly define the types which a generic client should handle. Otherwise, like you said, `hydra:Resource` is a totally open-ended fallback. I'm curious about your other ideas. While I don't think `supportedClass` fits SHACL, I would like to know what you had in mind for `hydra:property` Sent from Nine ________________________________ From: Karol Szczepański <notifications@github.com> Sent: Saturday, 23 May 2020 20:44 To: HydraCG/Specifications Cc: Tomasz Pluskiewicz; Author Subject: Re: [HydraCG/Specifications] Native SHACL support (#214) I like the idea of having SHACL on board - I was among those suggesting it in last years. We just need to move carefully - removing the rdfs:range is a breaking change and we need to make it as least breaking as possible. I also find it a bit surprising to modify hydra:expects - I though we've already made a modification allowing to have a hydra:resource so everything can be expected (including raw resources). I'd look rather at hydra:property or hydra:supportedClass so these can accept SHACL constructs. — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe. -- GitHub Notification of comment by tpluscode Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/HydraCG/Specifications/issues/214#issuecomment-633127590 using your GitHub account
Received on Saturday, 23 May 2020 19:54:35 UTC