W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-shapes@w3.org > August 2014

summarizing proposed changes to charter

From: Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 20:55:49 -0400
To: public-rdf-shapes@w3.org
Cc: Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@us.ibm.com>
Message-ID: <20140813005547.GB24450@w3.org>
Hi all, we can have a face-to-face at the W3C Technical Plenary in
November if we can quickly endorse a good-enough charter.  As it
stands now, it isn't clear that the group will be able to reach
consensus within the Working Group, let alone get through the member
review without objection.

Please review the proposals that I've culled from the list.  I
encournage compromise on all our parts and we'll have to suppress the
desire to wordsmith. (Given the 3-month evaluation period,
wordsmithing won't change much anyways.)

separate semantics:

  "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com> - Message-ID: <53E2AFBD.9050102@gmail.com>
    A syntax and semantics for shapes specifying how to construct shape expressions and how shape expressions are evaluated against RDF graphs.
  "Dam, Jesse van" <jesse.vandam@wur.nl> - Message-ID: <63CF398D7F09744BA51193F17F5252AB1FD60B24@SCOMP0936.wurnet.nl>
    defining the the (direct) semantics meaning of shapes and defining the associated validation process.

  opposition: Holger Knublauch

  proposed resolution: include, noting that if SPARQL is judged to be useful for the semantics, there's nothing preventing us from using it.

make graph normalization optional or use-case specific:

  "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com> - Message-ID: <53E2AFBD.9050102@gmail.com>
    3 OPTIONAL A specification of how shape verification interacts with inference.
  Jeremy J Carroll <jjc@syapse.com> - Message-Id: <D954B744-05CD-4E5C-8FC2-C08A9A99BA9F@syapse.com>
    the WG will consider whether it is necessary, practical or desireable to normalize a graph...
    A graph normalization method, suitable for  the use cases determined by the group....
  David Booth <david@dbooth.org> - Message-ID: <53E28D07.9000804@dbooth.org>
    OPTIONAL - A Recommendation for normalization/canonicalization of RDF graphs and RDF datasets that are serialized in N-Triples and N-Quads. opposition - don't do it at all:
  "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com> - Message-ID: <53E3A4CB.4040200@gmail.com>
    the WG should not be working on this.

  proposed resolution: withdrawn, to go to new light-weight, focused WG, removing this text:
  The WG MAY produce a Recommendation for graph normalization.

mandatory human-facing language:

  "Dam, Jesse van" <jesse.vandam@wur.nl> - Message-ID: <63CF398D7F09744BA51193F17F5252AB1FD60B24@SCOMP0936.wurnet.nl>
    ShExC mandatory, but potentially as a Note.
  David Booth <david@dbooth.org> - Message-ID: <53E28D07.9000804@dbooth.org>
    In Section 4 (Deliverables), change "OPTIONAL - Compact, human-readable syntax" to "Compact, human-readable syntax", i.e., make it required.
  Jeremy J Carroll <jjc@syapse.com> - Message-Id: <54AA894F-F4B4-4877-8806-EB85FB5A42E5@syapse.com>

  opposition - make it OPTIONAL
  "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com> - Message-ID: <53E2AFBD.9050102@gmail.com>
    OPTIONAL A compact, human-readable syntax for expressing shapes.

  proposed resolution: keep as OPTIONAL, not mentioning ShExC, but clarifying that it's different from the RDF syntax.

report formats:
  Dimitris Kontokostas <kontokostas@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>
    provide flexible validation execution plans that range from:
      Success / fail
      Success / fail per constraint
      Fails with error counts
      Individual resources that fail per constraint
      And enriched failed resources with annotations

  proposed resolution: no change, noting that no one seconded this proposal.

test suite/validator:

  Dimitris Kontokostas <kontokostas@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>
    Validation results are very important for the progress of this WG and should be a standalone deliverable.
  David Booth <david@dbooth.org> - Message-ID: <53E28D07.9000804@dbooth.org>
    Test Suite, to help ensure interoperability and correct implementation. The group will chose the location of this deliverable, such as a git repository.

  proposed resolution: leave from charter as WGs usually choose to do this anyways and it has no impact on IP commitments.


office: +1.617.599.3509
mobile: +

Feel free to forward this message to any list for any purpose other than
email address distribution.

There are subtle nuances encoded in font variation and clever layout
which can only be seen by printing this message on high-clay paper.
Received on Wednesday, 13 August 2014 00:55:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:02:40 UTC