- From: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
- Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 10:17:18 +1000
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>, public-rdf-shapes@w3.org
Ok, change applied. Holger On 27/02/2017 21:51, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > That's even more mystifying. > > The addition is: > The term <em>value</em> is sometimes used in statements such as "every value > of X is..." without referring to a specific subject. > In those cases, the statement applies to any subject that has a value for X. > > This sounds like it is the subjects that are to be considered. > > > If an unrestricted universal meaning is the correct one then wording like > > The phrase "Every value of P in graph G ..." means "Every object of a triple > in G with predicate P ..." > > is much better. > > Peter F. Patel-Schneider > Nuance Communications > > On 02/26/2017 10:27 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote: >> I have added a clarification for this case: >> >> https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/commit/abc55fe3380a94f1ae74e3453a904778f36eee6a >> >> >> I do believe it was rather redundant though because the definition of "value" >> already implied the existence of a subject. >> >> Holger >> >> >> On 27/02/2017 2:29, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: >>> In several places in the SHACL document there is wording like "Every value >>> of sh:shapesGraph is an IRI" with "value" linking back to the definition of >>> property values and paths. However, value is defined there on an RDF term >>> and a property, not on a single RDF term. >>> >>> There needs to be a suitable definition of value added to support these >>> uses. >>> >>> Peter F. Patel-Schneider >>> Nuance Communications >>> >>
Received on Tuesday, 28 February 2017 00:17:54 UTC