W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-shapes@w3.org > February 2017

Re: probably-editorial issue in Section 6.2.3.2 - no longer editorial

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2017 14:41:19 -0800
To: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>, public-rdf-shapes@w3.org, team-data-shapes-chairs@w3.org
Message-ID: <ea2bebee-df0f-ac99-bf81-0af91dd6add5@gmail.com>
I find it quite worrisome that substantive changes to SHACl are only
considered by the working group "in bulk".  How can the working group be
confident that these changes do not introduce new technical problems or go
against what the working group considers to be the right design for SHACL?

Peter F. Patel-Schneider
Nuance Communications


On 02/08/2017 02:32 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote:
> 
> 
> On 9/02/2017 3:50, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
>> The result looks better.  However the change in the document is not a
>> clarification, but instead a fix to part of SHACL.  Further, the change is
>> incorrectly described in the revision history.
> I believe the substance of your issue has been addressed. Thanks again for
> pointing that out.
> 
>>
>> Has the working group signed off on this change to SHACL?
> 
> It is practically infeasible to ask the WG for permission for every email
> response that a member is making. In terms of process, we have decided to
> approve such changes in bulk, whenever the WG votes on publishing a new version.
> 
> Holger
> 
> 
>>
>> Peter F. Patel-Schneider
>> Nuance Communications
>>
>> On 02/07/2017 05:16 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote:
>>> Right, this detail got lost in the refactoring when we removed the dependency
>>> on EXISTS.
>>>
>>> I have added clarification here:
>>>
>>> https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/commit/57f407027745663ffb6bcd593152aeb5835e530f
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Holger
>>>
>>>
>>> On 7/02/2017 17:44, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
>>>> Section 6.3 does not correctly describe the execution semantics of ASK-based
>>>> validators.  ASK queries do not return solutions.
>>>>
>>>> peter
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 02/06/2017 11:25 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote:
>>>>> Section 6.2 is about the syntax only. The validation semantics are explained
>>>>> in 6.3.
>>>>>
>>>>> Holger
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 7/02/2017 16:34, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
>>>>>> It appears that the non-normative boundary is one paragraph too early in
>>>>>> Section 6.2.3.2.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> peter
>>>>>>
>>>
> 
> 
Received on Wednesday, 8 February 2017 22:41:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:02:48 UTC