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

Re: on value

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
Message-ID: <6395024e-94cf-e35f-f310-38641175232f@topquadrant.com>
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

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