- From: Dimitris Kontokostas <kontokostas@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>
- Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2016 20:48:06 +0300
- To: james anderson <james@dydra.com>
- Cc: "public-rdf-sha." <public-rdf-shapes@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CA+u4+a3Ufj0kO_ce2nTdWb1qUQnCDE+UJa1h3XvEsShAPNNCZw@mail.gmail.com>
Dear James Based on your feedback the WG decided to explore new names for the terms scope / in-scope This issue is is tracked here: https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/175 and we created some new proposals for voting here: https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/Proposals#ISSUE-175:_rename_scope you are again welcome to suggest your terms Best, Dimitris On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 9:23 PM, Dimitris Kontokostas < kontokostas@informatik.uni-leipzig.de> wrote: > Hello James and thank you for your feedback, > > The WG will provide a formal reply to your comments after it is discussed > in one of the following weekly telcos. > As an informal comment & based on the definitions of the current draft > > the term itself is intended to characterize a triple > > > The term in-scope is not intended to characterize a triple but a node > "the scope of a shape defines which (RDF) nodes in the data graph are > in-scope for that shape" so it is a relation between a Shape and Set of > nodes and define which RDF nodes the shape can "see" > http://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/shacl/#dfn-scope > > why do you not use a term which better connotes that that meaning > > > We did try in the past to come up with a better terms for scoping, > filtering & focus nodes without success, I am sure the WG will consider any > new suggestions > > Best regards, > Dimitris > > On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 10:12 AM, james anderson <james@dydra.com> wrote: > >> good morning; >> >> the term “in-scope” appears frequently in the current draft[1] where its >> definition and usage run contrary to the meaning which is customarily >> associated with the word[2]. >> if your intent is to produce a document which is accessible and readily >> understood, if the term itself is intended to characterize a triple, rather >> than the relation between a name and lexical entity, and its usage involves >> computing the subset of a graph, why do you not use a term which better >> connotes that that meaning? >> >> best regards, from berlin, >> — >> [1] : http://www.w3.org/TR/2016/WD-shacl-20160530/ >> [2] : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scope_(computer_science) >> >> >> --- >> james anderson | james@dydra.com | http://dydra.com >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > -- > Dimitris Kontokostas > Department of Computer Science, University of Leipzig & DBpedia > Association > Projects: http://dbpedia.org, http://rdfunit.aksw.org, > http://aligned-project.eu > Homepage: http://aksw.org/DimitrisKontokostas > Research Group: AKSW/KILT http://aksw.org/Groups/KILT > > -- Dimitris Kontokostas Department of Computer Science, University of Leipzig & DBpedia Association Projects: http://dbpedia.org, http://rdfunit.aksw.org, http://aligned-project.eu Homepage: http://aksw.org/DimitrisKontokostas Research Group: AKSW/KILT http://aksw.org/Groups/KILT
Received on Friday, 22 July 2016 17:49:02 UTC