ISSUE-191: Should the value types of parameters be constraints
Parameter value types
Should the value types of parameters be constraints
- State:
- CLOSED
- Product:
- SHACL Spec
- Raised by:
- Holger Knublauch
- Opened on:
- 2016-10-18
- Description:
- In the currently published draft of the spec, each parameter of the core vocabulary is annotated with a column "Value type" that carries no meaning. Peter also stated that some of these value types are rather unhelpful:
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-shapes/2016Oct/0059.html
I think we should do a proper job here and make the value types more useful, making SHACL more predictable. The Value types column should be deleted and instead the TEXTUAL DEFINITION of each component should enumerate constraints on these values. Shapes graphs that violate these constraints are invalid.
I have made these changes to the draft and would like the WG to review them:
https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/commit/292f12936181ca2d3fd5c096a7880f2de6054f02
My proposal is to approve these changes. - Related Actions Items:
- No related actions
- Related emails:
- Re: shapes-ISSUE-191 (Parameter value types): Should the value types of parameters be constraints [SHACL Spec] (from holger@topquadrant.com on 2016-10-19)
- Re: shapes-ISSUE-191 (Parameter value types): Should the value types of parameters be constraints [SHACL Spec] (from kcoyle@kcoyle.net on 2016-10-18)
- Re: shapes-ISSUE-191 (Parameter value types): Should the value types of parameters be constraints [SHACL Spec] (from kcoyle@kcoyle.net on 2016-10-18)
- shapes-ISSUE-191 (Parameter value types): Should the value types of parameters be constraints [SHACL Spec] (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2016-10-18)
Related notes:
RESOLUTION: close ISSUE-191 accepting <https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/commit/292f12936181ca2d3fd5c096a7880f2de6054f02> modulo changing 2119 keywords
See https://www.w3.org/2016/11/02-shapes-minutes.html#ResolutionSummary
Display change log