Re: ISSUE-133 syntax simplifications & regularizations

OK, no more sh:defaultValueType.  Good.

How does the syntax of constraints work now?


Can any triples be removed from the following RDF graph without changing
its validation behaviour?  If so, which ones?

@prefix rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> .
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
@prefix sh: <http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl#> .
@prefix ex: <http://example.com/ns#> .

ex:s1 a sh:Shape ;
 sh:scopeClass ex:Foo ;
 sh:node [ a sh:NodeConstraint ;
     sh:nodeKind sh:IRI ] ;
 sh:property [ a sh:PropertyConstraint ;
         sh:predicate ex:p ;
         sh:class ex:Bar ] .


Does the following RDF graph contain a syntactically-valid SHACL shape?  If
not, why not?

@prefix rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> .
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
@prefix sh: <http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl#> .
@prefix ex: <http://example.com/ns#> .

ex:NodeConstraint rdfs:subClassOf sh:NodeConstraint .
ex:subClassOf rdfs:subPropertyOf rdfs:subClassOf .
ex:PropertyConstraint ex:subClassOf sh:PropertyConstraint .

ex:s2 a sh:Shape ;
 sh:scopeClass ex:Foo ;
 sh:node [ a ex:NodeConstraint ;
     sh:nodeKind sh:IRI ] ;
 sh:property [ a ex:PropertyConstraint ;
         sh:predicate ex:p ;
         sh:class ex:Bar ] .

peter



On 05/10/2016 07:36 AM, Dimitris Kontokostas wrote:
> After a quick offline discussion with Holger we would like to propose some
> work towards syntax simplification
> 
> The proposal has 2 aspects that go together
> 1. we remove the sh:defaultValueType from SHACL (Peter also had concerns with
> this - see issue-128)
> 2. we simplify sh:constraint in the following ways
> 
> a. sh:constraint is renamed to sh:node (other names welcome) and may have only
> values of sh:NodeConstraint type
> b. native sparql constraints (which could be used inside sh:constraint) are
> now declared separately using a new property sh:sparqlConstraint that allows
> only sh:SparqlConstraints
> 
> We believe this is a simplification everyone will like and would like to put
> it in the agenda for the next telco. Any comments are welcome
> 
> rational for this change is the discussion for wording section 2.3. 
> sh:defaultValueType was complicating things and one of the reasons it was
> introduced is to disambiguate the values of sh:constraint.
> With this change every predicate can have only one possible type now
> and sh:defaultValueType is no longer needed
> 
> Best,
> Dimitris
> 
> -- 
> Dimitris Kontokostas
> Department of Computer Science, University of Leipzig & DBpedia Association
> Projects: http://dbpedia.org, http://rdfunit.aksw.org,
> http://http://aligned-project.eu <http://aligned-project.eu/>
> Homepage:http://aksw.org/DimitrisKontokostas
> Research Group: AKSW/KILT http://aksw.org/Groups/KILT
>

Received on Tuesday, 10 May 2016 16:01:16 UTC