Re: sh:in is closed vs sh:hasValue is open

> Harvard

I must be blind. Or maybe confused Havard and Harvard :-)
>  confusing to have a new constraint component with exactly the same local
name. I would prefer having some difference in the name e.g.,
dash:inOpenList

But we're proposing a different local name: *dash:valueIn*. It uses parts
of sh:in and sh:hasValue to show the relation.
Or would you prefer the slightly longer *dash:hasValueIn *?