- From: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
- Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2016 12:18:20 +1000
- To: public-rdf-shapes@w3.org
... or we could limit it to IRI predicates, renaming it to sh:resultPredicate. This would allow us to continue to support meaningful results for sh:closed. In any case we would avoid the complications of the path syntax. Holger On 9/12/2016 11:55, Holger Knublauch wrote: > What would you think about deleting this property from the results? We > already have a pointer sh:sourceConstraint, which contains all that > information. > > Holger > > > > On 9/12/2016 11:29, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ISSUE<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< >> The requirements for values of sh:resultPath in validation results are >> impossible to achieve, poorly defined, contradictory, and problematic >> for >> applications that consume validation reports.. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ISSUE<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< >> >> 3.4.2.2 Path (sh:resultPath) >> Validation results may have a value for the property sh:resultPath >> pointing >> at a well-formed property path starting with the given sh:focusNode. For >> results produced by a property constraint, this path is always >> identical to >> either the sh:predicate or sh:path of the constraint. >> >> >> A property path is a "possible route in a graph between two graph >> nodes". >> There is no definition of route to be found in the document. It is >> thus not >> possible to point to a property path, well-formed or not. >> >> The values of sh:predicate and sh:path in shapes graphs are SHACL >> property >> paths. As objects of triples in a graph these values are nodes in the >> graph, and certainly not routes of any kind. >> >> Identity of RDF terms is not defined in RDF, so it is not completely >> clear >> what the second sentence in the description above means. The only >> reasonable interpretation appears to be that value of sh:resultPath >> is the >> same as the object of the sh:predicate or sh:path triple, which >> implies that >> validation results will contain nodes taken from shapes graphs. This is >> contradictory as nodes are not paths. >> >> This is also problematic for applications that consume validation >> reports as >> it requires the ability to take a blank node from one graph and find the >> same blank node in another graph, which is not always possible in RDF. >> >> >> This is yet another case of malformed descriptions in the document. The >> document needs to be changed to provide a well-formed description for >> the >> value of sh:resultPath in validation results. A complete examination >> of the >> document by a competent member of the working group is needed to find >> and >> eliminate other similar problems in the document. >> >> >> Peter F. Patel-Schneider >> Nuance Communications >> >> >> >
Received on Friday, 9 December 2016 02:18:56 UTC