Re: shapes-ISSUE-154 (value set not defined): the description of sh:equals and sh:disjoint use the term "value set", which is not defined

A simple fix would be to change "value set" which is a noun that could 
introduce a term to "set of values".

Instead of raising individual issues for these editorial changes, a better 
approach would be to include a set of them in a document review with 
proposed changes to address the concerns.


Jim Amsden, Senior Technical Staff Member
OSLC and Linked Lifecycle Data
919-525-6575




From:   Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
To:     RDF Data Shapes Working Group <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
Date:   04/28/2016 03:25 AM
Subject:        Re: shapes-ISSUE-154 (value set not defined): the 
description of  sh:equals and sh:disjoint use the term "value set", which 
is not defined



The term "value set" is used with its intuitive plain english meaning, 
based on the assumption that the reader knows what the team "value" of a 
property means. A value set is then simply the set of all values. How 
could this be misinterpreted by anyone?

Holger


On 28/04/2016 16:51, RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
> shapes-ISSUE-154 (value set not defined): the description of sh:equals 
and sh:disjoint use the term "value set", which is not defined
>
> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/154
>
> Raised by: Dean Allemang
> On product:
>
> There is no description or definition of "value set", which is used in 
the description of sh:equals and sh:disjoint.
>
>
>