- From: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
- Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2015 10:48:10 +1000
- To: RDF Data Shapes Working Group <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
On 8/5/2015 10:43, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > I do not think that my statement is misleading. Yes, the only current way to > access the other graphs in a dataset is via SPARQL, but if this is considered > to be an important feature, then it can be put in the core/high-level language. Yes it is IMHO an important feature and therefore should go into the core language. > > My view is that the right place to "assemble" information together is outside > of SHACL, not inside it. So if I want to publish a collection of instances on the web, how can I communicate to other tools that I expect this file to follow the shapes from a given shapes graph? People do this all the time in XML files. XML editors use this information to provide auto-complete, on-the-fly syntax checking etc. Just like sh:shapesGraph would do. Holger
Received on Wednesday, 5 August 2015 00:48:47 UTC