- From: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
- Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 10:36:35 +1000
- To: public-rdf-shapes@w3.org
Ok thanks for chiming in. Better to discuss it directly :) So the intention of using $scopeNode (in exactly that syntax) was to indicate that the variable *is* formally bound with the value of sh:scopeNode. The reason why I did not elaborate on this is that I didn't want to overburden that part of the spec. But I agree it is not clear as given. I have tried to clarify this: https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/commit/a715d493abb58fcd42242bcdfb91e5188e8b695f If you refresh your browser on http://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/shacl/#scopeNode you should see the newer wording. If that's an improvement, I can do the same for the other scope types. So: is this clearer, or what else would be needed? Holger On 8/07/2016 10:19, Tom Johnson wrote: > Since it's apparently me (among others) under discussion at[0], I'll > chime in: > > My problem with the use of `$scopeNode` and similar is primarily that > these variables are not formally bound in what purports to be the > defining formalism of the language. The problem is not that these need > further (informal, tutorial-style) explication, but that leaning on > this construction makes the foundations of the language vague. > > I'm not asking for instruction on how to use the language; I'm looking > for enough clarity that I can implement it. > > Tom Johnson > Metadata & Platform Architect > Digital Public Library of America > > [0] > https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-data-shapes-wg/2016Jul/0021.html
Received on Friday, 8 July 2016 00:37:23 UTC