- From: Dimitris Kontokostas <kontokostas@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>
- Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2016 17:10:09 +0300
- To: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- Cc: "public-rdf-sha." <public-rdf-shapes@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CA+u4+a0tFGk2MqZpXsC_AvTgNUY8Ek1LMSBaOLZKaa+EJpVCbQ@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Peter, Karen, I already eliminated all these occurrences https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/commits/gh-pages On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 4:52 PM, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote: > Peter, I did miss the "constrains" in the property pair section, so I will > try to come up with a different wording for that and will propose it. The > usage in 4.7.2 is, IMO, in accordance with English language usage, and I > think is appropriate here. > > kc > > > On 9/27/16 9:16 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > >> From Section 4.6.1 of Shapes Constraint Language (SHACL) W3C Editor's >>> Draft 27 >>> >> September 2016 at http://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/shacl >> >> "sh:equals constrains a pair of properties so that the sets of values of >> both >> properties at a given focus node must be equal." >> >> This contradicts the claim in >> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-data-shapes-wg/2 >> 016Sep/0046.html >> that ``constraint is still used, but no more "constrain" or >> "constraining". So >> it's a thing, but not a verb.'' >> >> There is a total of six uses of "constrains" in the document. >> >> >> The working group appears to have closed ISSUE-163 based on incorrect >> information. >> >> >> Peter F. Patel-Schneider >> Nuance Communications >> >> >> > -- > Karen Coyle > kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net > m: 1-510-435-8234 > skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600 > > -- 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 Wednesday, 28 September 2016 14:11:06 UTC