Re: shapes-ISSUE-115 (ClosedShape): Current way of specifying closed shapes is not satisfactory [SHACL Spec]

I personally don't find this syntax attractive, as it does not clearly 
communicate that

- sh:closed leads to constraint checks
- sh:closed and sh:ignoredProperties belong together

I believe your proposal introduces an unnecessary inconsistency in the 
syntax that impacts how engines need to be designed, and is in the end 
harder to explain to users. I also don't think that "closed shape" is 
fundamentally different from other constraints on shapes, e.g. sh:or.

I will stick to my previous suggestion

ex:ClosedShapeExampleShape
     a sh:Shape ;
     sh:constraint [
         sh:closed true ;
         sh:ignoredProperties ( rdf:type ) ;
     ] .

Holger


On 17/12/2015 4:57 AM, Arthur Ryman wrote:
> I've made this comment a few times. My concern is that closeness,
> although certainly a constraint, is very unlike all the other
> constraints. It is more like a characteristic of the shape as a whole.
> I'd therefore prefer to see it promoted to be a property of the shape
> instead of being just another constraint.
>
> Concretely, the Turtle would look like this for Example 31:
>
> ex:ClosedShapeExampleShape
>    a sh:Shape ;
>    sh:close true;
>    sh:ignoredProperties (rdf:type) ;
>    sh:property [
>      sh:predicate ex:exampleProperty1 ;
>    ] ;
>    sh:property [
>      sh:predicate ex:exampleProperty2 ;
>    ] .
>
> Or we could introduce a new class:
> sh:ClosedShape rdfs:subClassOf sh:Shape .
>
> ex:ClosedShapeExampleShape
>    a sh:ClosedShape ;
>    sh:ignoredProperties (rdf:type) ;
>    sh:property [
>      sh:predicate ex:exampleProperty1 ;
>    ] ;
>    sh:property [
>      sh:predicate ex:exampleProperty2 ;
>    ] .
>
> -- Arthur
>
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 2:42 PM, RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue
> Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote:
>> shapes-ISSUE-115 (ClosedShape): Current way of specifying closed shapes is not satisfactory [SHACL Spec]
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/115
>>
>> Raised by: Arnaud Le Hors
>> On product: SHACL Spec
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>

Received on Friday, 18 December 2015 15:28:30 UTC