Re: Reopening the discussion on sh:targetShape

Hi,

The javascript language has a nice phased system where you can contribute your own extensions to the language into the core as long as it goes through a set of phases. 

For SHACL we could have:

 - phase 0: formal spec with definition and example
 - phase 1: proof of concept implementation
 - phase 2: full implementation
 - phase 3: two or more competing implementations 

And maybe more phases or something official at the end. 

This would essentially be creating a new standardisation process, but the benefit would be that everything would essentially get accepted in phase 0 and there would be very clear rules for moving up the ladder. 

Things could probably end up in the actual W3C recommendation at some point, but that process is a lot bigger (and costlier). 

Then again we are a very small community in contrast to the JavaScript community and they probably have a lot more resources to run this. 

I’m very grateful that we in particular have Holger and Irene to help answer questions, review proposals and even go as far as to implement them. 

Håvard

> On 10 Jul 2020, at 01:40, Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Yes quite possibly we should have a document similar to SHACL-AF but for proposed features? Or is keeping PRs open sufficient?
> 
> In general I think if there is wide agreement on features then they could directly go into SHACL-AF, as that is an evolving draft towards a possible 1.1 release. Then I think it's also OK to use the sh: namespace.
> 
> Holger
> 
> 
> 
> On 10/07/2020 06:25, Roman Evstifeev wrote:
>> I wonder if it would be more appropriate to create something like shacl-cg org on GitHub to have a namespace https://github.com/shacl-cg/ ? 
>> 
>> On Thu, Jul 9, 2020, 22:50 Vladimir Alexiev <vladimir.alexiev@ontotext.com> wrote:
>>> Havard and I are thinking of putting this in an rdf4j namespace.
>>> 
>>> Cheers!