- From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- Date: Fri, 13 May 2016 21:22:14 -0700
- To: public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org
Looking at this:
On 5/13/16 5:23 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote:
> ex:MyShape
> a sh:Shape ;
> rdfs:comment "every dct:subject must have IRIs as objects" ;
> sh:scopeProperty dct:subject ;
> sh:property [
> sh:predicate dct:subject ;
> sh:nodeKind sh:IRI ;
> ] .
There is 100% redundancy between sh:scopeProperty and the constraint. If
I were to state what I want to do in terms of validation, it would come
out like this:
ex:MyShape
a sh:Shape ;
rdfs:comment "every dct:subject must have IRIs as objects" ;
sh:property [
sh:predicate dct:subject ;
sh:nodeKind sh:IRI ;
] .
because I am not using a scope at all. What this means is what is in the
comment. A scope, logically, is a selection from the data graph, but
this use case makes no such selection, and the constraint is sufficient.
Is there a use of scopeProperty that would not be redundant?
kc
--
Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
Received on Saturday, 14 May 2016 04:22:39 UTC