Re: Proposal to resolve ISSUE-86

On 10/12/2015 16:01, Dimitris Kontokostas wrote:
>
> In the context of this issue, when someone implicitly loads the shapes 
> of e.g. foaf/skos (if they are defined inline or with owl:imports) and 
> she performs a validation with everything in one graph, then the 
> shapes of foaf/skos will be enforced in the data. If this is the 
> user's intention, everything is fine, if the user would like to 
> deviate from these shapes, it is very hard to isolate these shapes 
> from the validation.

If a user wants to deviate from these (default) shapes then they should 
link from their data to another graph via sh:shapesGraph. This can 
already be handled. What you seem to suggest is a way to link from an 
ontology to one (or more?) *possible* or *recommended* shapes graph with 
a property similar to rdfs:seeAlso. While this may sometimes be useful, 
there is a trade-off here in how complex do we want this language to 
become, and how many people will still understand all these nuances.

Holger

Received on Monday, 12 October 2015 06:12:02 UTC