- From: Svensson, Lars <L.Svensson@dnb.de>
- Date: Wed, 31 May 2017 15:07:16 +0000
- To: Andra Waagmeester <andra@micelio.be>, Thomas Baker <tom@tombaker.org>
- CC: Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>, "public-shex@w3.org" <public-shex@w3.org>
On Wednesday, May 31, 2017 1:55 PM, Andra Waagmeester [mailto:andra@micelio.be] wrote: > On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 9:43 AM, Thomas Baker <tom@tombaker.org> wrote: > On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 06:16:10PM -0400, Eric Prudhommeaux wrote: > > Hi gang, on Friday, we agreed with Sandro's proposal that the keyword > > "SHACL" discriminate SHACL compact syntax from ShEx. Holger counter- > > proposed either "shapeClass" or "shape". Speaking to a few of you, it > > seems that "shape" serves only to muddy the waters as it is part of > > both languages (with different meanings). I expect we can all agree > > with Holger's proposal that SHACL compact syntax discriminate itself > > with the use of the keyword "shapeClass". > > > > PROPOSE: accept publication of the SHACL compact syntax with SHACL > > shape classes prefixed with the keyword "shapeClass". > > > > ericP: +1 > > Tom +1 LarsG +1
Received on Wednesday, 31 May 2017 15:07:54 UTC