- From: Tomasz Pluskiewicz via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 25 May 2020 10:06:09 +0000
- To: public-hydra-logs@w3.org
I am completely lost. For one, I don't understand why you bring in the `rdfs:Class` and `owl:Class`. They are not even used with IRI templates. By using SHACL for both `hydra:expects` as well as `hydra:mapping` we gain uniformity. Same shared W3C standard to define the request graphs as well as the graph mapped to the template variables. > I think `IriTemplateMapping` is good enough to cover any scenario. Surely, SHACL has features which we cannot currently match. Such as cardinalities, `sh:order`, `sh:group` and much more. I would hardly want to reinvent that in `hydra:` namespace. Much less use OWL -- GitHub Notification of comment by tpluscode Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/HydraCG/Specifications/issues/214#issuecomment-633493649 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 25 May 2020 10:06:11 UTC