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

Union operations on graphs (was: Quick Comments on https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/WD-shacl-20160814/)

From: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2016 15:26:10 +1000
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>, public-rdf-shapes@w3.org, Dimitris Kontokostas <kontokostas@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>
Message-ID: <4794de99-94e8-fa30-b747-957e3baab5c4@topquadrant.com>
On 23/09/2016 11:36, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
>> union operations on data graphs and shapes graphs
>> It is unclear just what the data graph and the shapes graph are. There is
> wording that both of these cannot be changed. However, there is also wording
> that various kinds of union operations are to be performed on shapes and
> data graphs.
>>      Comment (HK): The only place I could find "union" was about handling
> of owl:imports, which states that the result of this union is used as shapes
> graph. This looks OK to me. Could you clarify what you mean?
>>      Comment (DK): I tried to make the wording clearer here:
> https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/commit/b6fd2db5719cc9c9bdec464acdd2aefc8d0b5b68
> I don't find this much better.  If the shapes graph and the data graph
> cannot be changed then there should not be wording about unioning,
> extending, or otherwise modifying the shapes graph or the data graph.

Dimitris, do you have time to revise this further? I guess we need to 
find a different term than "shapes graph" for the originally supplied 
graph. The real shapes graph may be the one that is the output of the 
transitive closure process.

Received on Friday, 23 September 2016 05:26:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:02:44 UTC