ISSUE-52: Define an Abstract Syntax for SHACL

abstract syntax

Define an Abstract Syntax for SHACL

State:
CLOSED
Product:
SHACL Spec
Raised by:
Jose Emilio Labra Gayo
Opened on:
2015-05-23
Description:
One of the already approved requirements is that SHACL should be a higher
level language.

To do that, most languages define an abstract syntax
or functional specification which describes the main constructs of the
language without depending on any concrete syntax.

Most language specifications are defined based on an abstract syntax. For
example:

RDF Abstract Syntax and concepts (http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/)

SPARQL (http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-query/#sparqlDefinition)

OWL (http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/REC-owl2-syntax-20121211/)

There are several advantages when defining an abstract syntax for describing
a language like:

-Separation of concerns: it is possible to identify which are the language constructs and separate them from the semantic formalism in which they are defined

- Allowing the language designers to concentrate on the language concepts instead of syntactic details

- Identification of possible redundant constructs or constructs that can be added

- Mapping between one concrete syntax to another concrete syntax. In the last VF2F3 meeting there seemed to be some consensus on defining a compact syntax for SHACL. In order to do so, it will be helpful to define first that abstract syntax so we could later map from that abstract syntax to the concrete syntax.

This issue is only about defining an abstract syntax for SHACL.

Having such an abstract syntax does not imply any compromise about the formalism used for the semantic definition which could be either by mappings to SPARQL or by other formalisms.





Related Actions Items:
No related actions
Related emails:
  1. proposed reply to Tom Baker [was Re: RDF Data Shapes WG agenda for 19 May 2016] (from pfpschneider@gmail.com on 2016-05-19)
  2. Re: RDF Data Shapes WG agenda for 19 May 2016 (from kcoyle@kcoyle.net on 2016-05-19)
  3. Re: RDF Data Shapes WG agenda for 19 May 2016 (from kontokostas@informatik.uni-leipzig.de on 2016-05-19)
  4. Re: RDF Data Shapes WG agenda for 19 May 2016 (from pfpschneider@gmail.com on 2016-05-18)
  5. Re: RDF Data Shapes WG agenda for 3 March 2016 (from holger@topquadrant.com on 2016-03-03)
  6. Re: Proposal to close ISSUE-29 as a duplicate (from holger@topquadrant.com on 2015-07-29)
  7. Re: Proposal to close ISSUE-29 as a duplicate (from pfpschneider@gmail.com on 2015-07-28)
  8. Re: Proposal to close ISSUE-29 as a duplicate (from pfpschneider@gmail.com on 2015-07-28)
  9. Proposal to close ISSUE-29 as a duplicate (from holger@topquadrant.com on 2015-07-28)
  10. Re: shapes-ISSUE-52 (labra): Define an Abstract Syntax for SHACL [SHACL Spec] (from arthur.ryman@gmail.com on 2015-06-10)
  11. shapes-ISSUE-52 (labra): Define an Abstract Syntax for SHACL [SHACL Spec] (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2015-05-23)

Related notes:

[ericP]: abstract syntax

30 Jun 2016, 18:36:26

RESOLUTION: Close ISSUE-52, put Eric's proposed abstract syntax into a Working Draft (Editor's draft)
https://www.w3.org/2016/07/07-shapes-minutes.html#resolution06

Arnaud Le Hors, 13 Jul 2016, 18:37:11

Display change log ATOM feed


Irene Polikoff <irene@topquadrant.com>, Ted Thibodeau <tthibodeau@openlinksw.com>, Chairs, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, Staff Contact
Tracker: documentation, (configuration for this group), originally developed by Dean Jackson, is developed and maintained by the Systems Team <w3t-sys@w3.org>.
$Id: index.php,v 1.325 2014-09-10 21:42:02 ted Exp $