On 19/07/2020 23:21, Holger Knublauch wrote:
On 19/07/2020 19:53, Andy Seaborne wrote:
Hi Chris,
Oddly, sh:group/sh:order aren't in SHACLC - they look like they got
overlooked as they fit is quite naturally into the grammar. Maybe the
WG focus was validation and these aren't
On 19/07/2020 19:53, Andy Seaborne wrote:
Hi Chris,
Oddly, sh:group/sh:order aren't in SHACLC - they look like they got
overlooked as they fit is quite naturally into the grammar. Maybe the
WG focus was validation and these aren't "validation".
All terms from the sh: namespace are
Hi Chris,
Oddly, sh:group/sh:order aren't in SHACLC - they look like they got
overlooked as they fit is quite naturally into the grammar. Maybe the WG
focus was validation and these aren't "validation".
dash:editor, and your own annotations:
There was a brief discussion on the SHACL CG list
