Issue with the scope of ?person in EXAMPLE: Applying an N3 patch.
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- HTML
- Stars
- 563
- Forks
- 108
- Avg merge
- 4d 13h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 3
Description
In the EYE implementation of N3 the scope of quickvars is the statement (i.e. triple or rule) level so in the EXAMPLE: Applying an N3 patch the quickvar ?person isn't co-referring hence the patch isn't working.
This has been a long standing N3 disagreement https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-cwm-talk/2015JanMar/0003.html
and in short, the assumption that the scope of quickvars is the parent graph leads to inconsistencies.
An alternative that works with EYE is at N3 patch example.
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Read the Solid protocol’s “Writing resources” section and compare its “EXAMPLE: Applying an N3 patch” with the alternative in the EYE repository’s reasoning/n3patch path. Investigate the linked quickvar-scope discussion; done means the specification example and its stated quickvar scope are made consistent.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Domain
- documentation
- Issue type
- Bug
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100