– DRAFT –
SHACL Rules TF

AndyS: choosing sections, try and refine what we're talking about in each of them and get some kind of scoping idea
… process-wise I put in a PR to change the document title and to move its location in Github
… we should cover the entire list today, rather than diving into any topic too deeply
… [shares screen]
… section 6 is currently just a place holder

Points to cover in the document

AndyS: So, talking about attaching rules to shapes. Parameterizations come up. How we explain valuation, maybe.
… Detaching rules to shapes, parameterization, and the negation ones that we need to make sure we have some... these are ones I don't know what the expectations are, and I'm not sure exactly what we mean. And obviously, is there anything else that we should have? So I guess the first call is... are there sections and discussions that ought to go

in the document that aren't listed there?

DavidHabgood: I've not brought it up last time we met, but... the stratification need a mention, or...? Is it, I don't know, implied, or refer to other specs, sort of thing.

<DavidHabgood> simonstey: attachment of rules in shacl 1.0 sparql construct, execution once per focus node. sh:condition vs. where clause in query, same functionality, different performance. Rules could have sh:order

<DavidHabgood> AndyS: clarified no dependency relationship in 1.0. How to handle rules depending on information from other shapes

<DavidHabgood> simonstey: it is not specified how this sort of issue should be handled; pyshacl & jena differ here

<DavidHabgood> AndyS & simonstey: can't express dependencies for rule ordering in shacl 1.0 at present

https://www.w3.org/TR/shacl-af/#rules-execution

<Robert> Trigger rules on constraint violations?

sparna-git/owl2shacl

<Robert> Use sh:condition to specify when rules are triggered.

<Robert> Attaching rules shapes and trigger them for target nodes is very flexible with SHACL 1.2 targeting.