ISSUE-182: Clarifications needed to section 3.0

Validation report

Clarifications needed to section 3.0

State:

CLOSED

Product:

SHACL Spec

Raised by:

Karen Coyle

Opened on:

2016-09-29

Description:

Section 3.0 on validation talks about the validation results, but doesn't explain clearly which properties are required and which are optional. It also should refer to the shapes graph as the source of the properties, not just to their appearance in the report. Some examples:

"3.4.1.3 Value (sh:value)

Validation results may have a value for the property sh:value pointing at a specific node that has caused the result."

- it isn't clear if sh:value MUST be returned if sh:value is coded in the constraint, or if echoing back sh:value when it exists is itself optional.

3.4.1.8 Declaring the Severity of a Constraint uses "can" not "MAY", and gives the default as sh:Violation (Does that mean T/F cannot have a default?). Better wording would be:

"The severity level of a constraint violation MAY be coded in the constraint of a shapes graph using the property sh:severity, which takes as its value one of the SHACL pre-defined severities, or a locally defined severity." (followed by remaining sentences)

Also, the example given shows the shapes graph, but would be more informative if it also included the validation report that results.

Note that examples throughout do not include sh:severity or sh:message in constraints, which requires some explanation, perhaps in the introductory area where examples are described. (I presume that it is expected that most or many constraints will include a severity, so it would be a normally occurring property, and that sh:message will also be common.)

The Example validation report in section 2.2 (Filter shapes) has sh:severity and sh:message although those are not shown in the shapes graph.

Related Actions Items:

No related actions

Related emails:

1. Re: Process Question: How to clean up meeting minutes (from eric@w3.org on 2017-01-06)
2. Re: Process Question: How to clean up meeting minutes (from holger@topquadrant.com on 2017-01-06)
3. Re: WG Meeting 2017-01-04 (from tthibodeau@openlinksw.com on 2017-01-03)
4. ISSUE-182: What else is missing? (from holger@topquadrant.com on 2016-10-12)
5. Re: shapes-ISSUE-182 (Validation report): [Editorial] Clarifications need to section 3.0 (from kcoyle@kcoyle.net on 2016-10-08)
6. Re: shapes-ISSUE-182 (Validation report): [Editorial] Clarifications need to section 3.0 (from holger@topquadrant.com on 2016-10-08)
7. Re: shapes-ISSUE-182 (Validation report): [Editorial] Clarifications need to section 3.0 (from kcoyle@kcoyle.net on 2016-10-07)
8. Re: shapes-ISSUE-182 (Validation report): [Editorial] Clarifications need to section 3.0 (from kcoyle@kcoyle.net on 2016-10-07)
9. Re: shapes-ISSUE-182 (Validation report): [Editorial] Clarifications need to section 3.0 (from holger@topquadrant.com on 2016-10-07)
10. Re: shapes-ISSUE-182 (Validation report): [Editorial] Clarifications need to section 3.0 (from holger@topquadrant.com on 2016-10-07)
11. Re: shapes-ISSUE-182 (Validation report): [Editorial] Clarifications need to section 3.0 (from holger@topquadrant.com on 2016-10-07)
12. Re: shapes-ISSUE-182 (Validation report): [Editorial] Clarifications need to section 3.0 (from kcoyle@kcoyle.net on 2016-10-06)
13. Re: shapes-ISSUE-182 (Validation report): [Editorial] Clarifications need to section 3.0 (from kcoyle@kcoyle.net on 2016-10-06)
14. Re: shapes-ISSUE-182 (Validation report): [Editorial] Clarifications need to section 3.0 (from holger@topquadrant.com on 2016-10-06)
15. Re: shapes-ISSUE-182 (Validation report): [Editorial] Clarifications need to section 3.0 (from kcoyle@kcoyle.net on 2016-09-30)
16. Re: shapes-ISSUE-181: SHACL conformance for partial validation reports [SHACL Spec] (from kcoyle@kcoyle.net on 2016-09-30)
17. Re: shapes-ISSUE-181: SHACL conformance for partial validation reports [SHACL Spec] (from holger@topquadrant.com on 2016-09-30)
18. Re: shapes-ISSUE-182 (Validation report): [Editorial] Clarifications need to section 3.0 (from holger@topquadrant.com on 2016-09-30)
19. Re: shapes-ISSUE-182 (Validation report): [Editorial] Clarifications need to section 3.0 (from holger@topquadrant.com on 2016-09-30)
20. Re: shapes-ISSUE-181: SHACL conformance for partial validation reports [SHACL Spec] (from holger@topquadrant.com on 2016-09-30)
21. Re: shapes-ISSUE-182 (Validation report): [Editorial] Clarifications need to section 3.0 (from holger@topquadrant.com on 2016-09-30)
22. Re: shapes-ISSUE-181: SHACL conformance for partial validation reports [SHACL Spec] (from kcoyle@kcoyle.net on 2016-09-29)
23. Re: shapes-ISSUE-182 (Validation report): [Editorial] Clarifications need to section 3.0 (from kcoyle@kcoyle.net on 2016-09-29)
24. Re: shapes-ISSUE-182 (Validation report): [Editorial] Clarifications need to section 3.0 (from kcoyle@kcoyle.net on 2016-09-29)
25. shapes-ISSUE-182 (Validation report): [Editorial] Clarifications need to section 3.0 (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2016-09-29)

Related notes:

Display change log