ISSUE-110: relationship between sh:constraint and sh:property and sh:inverseProperty

single-property constraints

relationship between sh:constraint and sh:property and sh:inverseProperty

State:

CLOSED

Product:

SHACL Spec

Raised by:

Peter Patel-Schneider

Opened on:

2015-11-04

Description:

http://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/shacl/ states:

2.3 Constraints

A shape defines a group of constraints. SHACL includes a collection of Core constraint types that are covered in the next section. Additional types of constraints can be added using the extension mechanism.

Shapes can be linked to their constraints via the following properties:

- sh:property links a shape with constraints about a given property of the focus node. These constraints are called property constraints.

- sh:inverseProperty links a shape with constraints about a given property traversed in the inverse direction of the focus node. These constraints are called inverse property constraints.

- sh:constraint link a shape with constraints that do not involve just a single dedicated property. SHACL includes property pair constraints and other constraints such as logical operators.


Example 41 does not follow this division:

Example 41: Shape definition using ex:LanguageConstraint

ex:TemplateLanguageExampleShape
a sh:Shape ;
sh:scopeClass ex:Country ;
sh:constraint [
a ex:LanguageConstraint ;
ex:predicate ex:germanLabel ;
ex:lang "de" ;
] ;
sh:constraint [
a ex:LanguageConstraint ;
ex:predicate ex:englishLabel ;
ex:lang "en" ;
] .

Either Example 41 should be changed or the division between sh:constraint, sh:property, and sh:inverseProperty should be changed.

Related Actions Items:

No related actions

Related emails:

1. Re: ISSUE-110: Can we close this? (from holger@topquadrant.com on 2016-05-10)
2. Re: ISSUE-110: Can we close this? (from kcoyle@kcoyle.net on 2016-05-09)
3. Re: ISSUE-110: Can we close this? (from holger@topquadrant.com on 2016-05-09)
4. Re: ISSUE-110: Can we close this? (from irene@topquadrant.com on 2016-05-07)
5. Re: ISSUE-110: Can we close this? (from pfpschneider@gmail.com on 2016-05-07)
6. Re: ISSUE-110: Can we close this? (from kontokostas@informatik.uni-leipzig.de on 2016-05-07)
7. Re: ISSUE-110: Can we close this? (from pfpschneider@gmail.com on 2016-04-27)
8. Re: ISSUE-110: Can we close this? (from lehors@us.ibm.com on 2016-04-27)
9. ISSUE-110: Can we close this? (from holger@topquadrant.com on 2016-04-06)
10. Re: connecting ISSUE-65 (Nomenclature) to other issues (from arthur.ryman@gmail.com on 2015-11-19)
11. Re: connecting ISSUE-65 (Nomenclature) to other issues (from pfpschneider@gmail.com on 2015-11-19)
12. Re: connecting ISSUE-65 (Nomenclature) to other issues (from arthur.ryman@gmail.com on 2015-11-19)
13. Re: shapes-ISSUE-110 (single-property constraints): relationship between sh:constraint and sh:property and sh:inverseProperty (from holger@topquadrant.com on 2015-11-05)
14. shapes-ISSUE-110 (single-property constraints): relationship between sh:constraint and sh:property and sh:inverseProperty (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2015-11-04)

Related notes:

Display change log