Thanks for the reply, Karen.

Just on the ShEx bit near the end.

3, what are we talking about?

I fully understand that defining terms is an iterative process that runs alongside building prototypes, and that the latter is much more fun, but it's really not worth getting too far in to discussing what is and isn't a valid value for a cell without defining what the cell is about.

In the present case, I'll note that "Value Type" and "Value Space" seem to map to "Literal datatype" "Node kind" "Value set" and "value shape" in ShEx, and without further definition it's kind of arbitrary which get munged together.

We do need to get clear about the value cells and I plan on putting that on our agenda for next week. However, I have some reservations about using ShEx specifically as our goal.

Agreed. I only mentioned that as an example for how there were, by one count, four different aspects of 'value' for which we have only two columns.

And since you mention

这可能得到哲学但我有一些什么estions that I think could be practical. ShEx addresses instance data that exists and is to be investigated; APs are definitions for metadata creation as well as metadata analysis. It's the difference between looking to see if a node exists and making an input rule that it must exist. I've had trouble seeing the creation goals as fitting into the ShEx "node" concept, but it would really help me to hash that one out using examples.

Not sure which bit of the node concept you mean, but "Node kind" can be useful when generating forms for creating data: the difference between "BNode" and "IRI" is the difference between having a group of fields that must be filled out for each entry and linking to a new or existing entity.

Phil