W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-shapes@w3.org > July 2016

Re: $variables

From: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 10:36:35 +1000
To: public-rdf-shapes@w3.org
Message-ID: <34e22598-a09e-8313-183f-76a42b6a444b@topquadrant.com>
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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:02:43 UTC