- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 12:14:55 -0800
- To: kcoyle@kcoyle.net, public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org
On 03/01/2016 09:20 PM, Karen Coyle wrote: > > > On 3/1/16 10:11 AM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: >> in a simple extension of the current SHACL RDF syntax this would be >> >> [ a sh:propertyConstraint ; >> sh:predicate ex:p ; >> sh:minCount 1 ; >> sh:class ex:c ; >> sh:maxCount 5 ; >> sh:class ex:d ; >> sh:minCount 3 ] > > Doesn't this require that there be order among the triples? Otherwise, how do > the two minCount's apply to the correct sh:Class triple? > > kc No. This is not a qualified cardinality. What this says is that there is at least one value for ex:p, that all values for ex:p belong to ex:c, that there are at most 5 values for ex:p, that all values for ex:p belong to ex:d, and that there are at least three values for ex:p. peter
Received on Thursday, 3 March 2016 20:15:25 UTC