ISSUE-107: annotations and arguments use different mechanisms for specifying the SPARQL variable name
annotations v. arguments
annotations and arguments use different mechanisms for specifying the SPARQL variable name
- State:
- CLOSED
- Product:
- SHACL Spec
- Raised by:
- Peter Patel-Schneider
- Opened on:
- 2015-10-29
- Description:
- Annotation properties use sh:annotationVarName to provide the SPARQL variable name to use. Arguments use the local part of their IRI. It would be better to have one mechanism.
- Related Actions Items:
- No related actions
- Related emails:
- Re: Editorial ISSUES that can be closed IMHO (from kcoyle@kcoyle.net on 2016-09-23)
- Editorial ISSUES that can be closed IMHO (from holger@topquadrant.com on 2016-09-23)
- Re: Please review the SHACL draft (was Re: Editing progress) (from holger@topquadrant.com on 2016-08-31)
- ISSUE-107: Declaring SPARQL variable for sh:Parameters (from holger@topquadrant.com on 2016-04-25)
- Re: shapes-ISSUE-107 (annotations v. arguments): annotations and arguments use different mechanisms for specifying the SPARQL variable name [SHACL Spec] (from kontokostas@informatik.uni-leipzig.de on 2015-10-30)
- Re: shapes-ISSUE-107 (annotations v. arguments): annotations and arguments use different mechanisms for specifying the SPARQL variable name [SHACL Spec] (from holger@topquadrant.com on 2015-10-30)
- Re: shapes-ISSUE-107 (annotations v. arguments): annotations and arguments use different mechanisms for specifying the SPARQL variable name [SHACL Spec] (from arthur.ryman@gmail.com on 2015-10-29)
- shapes-ISSUE-107 (annotations v. arguments): annotations and arguments use different mechanisms for specifying the SPARQL variable name [SHACL Spec] (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2015-10-29)
Related notes:
RESOLUTION: Close ISSUE-107 leaving annotation properties as currently specified
See http://www.w3.org/2016/09/27-shapes-minutes.html#resolution06
The resolution was not made based on whether this issue was to be considered editorial or not.
While the minutes do not capture the full discussion as it is often the case, it was said that Peter had pointed out that two different mechanisms were used and one would be better. The WG acknowledged Peter's point but decided to leave the spec as is.
Display change log
