- From: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
- Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2015 21:03:00 +1000
- To: public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org
On 9/9/15 8:50 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > We want a shape that is satisfied (i.e., not violated) by nodes that have > between nc and mc values (including unbounded) for ex:p that satisfy shape C > and between nb and mb values (including unbounded) for ex:p that satisfy > shape B and no other values for ex:p. Further there are no nodes that can > satisfy both C and B. > > This can be done with the following SHACL shape: > > S rdf:type sh:Shape ; > sh:property [ sh:predicate ex:p ; > sh:qualifiedValueShape C ; > sh:qualifiedMinCount nc ; > sh:qualifiedMaxCount mc ] ; > sh:property [ sh:predicate ex:p ; > sh:qualifiedValueShape B ; > sh:qualifiedMinCount nb ; > sh:qualifiedMaxCount mb ] ; > sh:property [ sh:predicate ex:p ; > sh:valueShape [ rdf:type sh:Shape ; > sh:constraint [ rdf:type sh:OrConstraint ; > sh:shapes ( C B ) ] ] ] . > > If the "no other values for ex:p" is not wanted, then the last constraint is > removed. > > If C and B are not disjoint, then the constraint > > sh:property [ sh:predicate ex:p ; > sh:valueShape [ rdf:type sh:Shape ; > sh:constraint [ rdf:type sh:AndConstraint ; > sh:shapes ( C B ) ] ] ; > sh:maxCount 0 ] Did you mean sh:qualifiedMaxCount here? Above, the sh:valueShape and sh:maxCount are independent, and maxCount will overrule the other constraint. Holger > > is added. > > NB: None of this has been checked against a SHACL implementation, so the > syntax might not be completely correct. > > > > peter >
Received on Wednesday, 9 September 2015 11:03:34 UTC