- From: Holger Knublauch via GitHub <noreply@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2025 11:57:33 +0000
- To: public-shacl@w3.org
HolgerKnublauch has just created a new issue for https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes: == Should we "officially" allow rdfs:label/comment instead of sh:name/description == Currently, many people misunderstand the intended semantics of sh:name and sh:description and would rather use rdfs:label and comment at property shapes. See https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7367747396455309313?commentUrn=urn%3Ali%3Acomment%3A%28activity%3A7367747396455309313%2C7367845601729855488%29&dashCommentUrn=urn%3Ali%3Afsd_comment%3A%287367845601729855488%2Curn%3Ali%3Aactivity%3A7367747396455309313%29 for one example discussion. But I have seen this before, many times. History shows if almost everyone struggles with some design decision, then maybe the decision wasn't good. One approach would be to use sh:name over rdfs:label and sh:description over rdfs:comment for their respective purposes. This way, sh:name and description can be phased out. Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/issues/558 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Tuesday, 2 September 2025 11:57:34 UTC