Re: Shapes/ShEx or the worrying issue of yet another syntax and lack of validated vision.

>
>     So you are saying that ShEx is ambiguous as to whether open or closed
>>     semantics is to be applied?  That seems to be a problem with the ShEx
>>     definition.
>>
>>
>> No, I am saying that there are two ways to implement Shape
>> expressions...one
>> with the open shapes that allows remaining triples and one with closed
>> shapes
>> which disallows them.
>>
>
> That's what I said, I think.
>

Well, you asked if ShEx "is ambiguous as to whether open or closed
semantics is to be applied?" and I answered no. Because it is not ambiguous
with regards to open or closed semantcs. It just can handle open shapes or
closed shapes.

In fact, what I propose is a syntax for ShEx so a user can declare an open
shape or a closed shape, which in my opinion is the best solution and is
similar to what regular expressions offer.

Best regards, Jose Labra