Re: on recursion in SHACL

Correct, it was on the "on undefined in SHACL" thread
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-shapes/2016Sep/0062.html

On Sat, Oct 1, 2016 at 11:46 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider <
pfpschneider@gmail.com> wrote:

> I was wondering which email from Holger is related to the original message
> I
> sent.  You state there is one in the sentence I copied just below without
> saying which one it is.
>
> > Your comments for recursion on section 9.4 were addressed by Holger in a
> separate email
>
> peter
>
>
> On 10/01/2016 01:38 PM, Dimitris Kontokostas wrote:
> > Hi Peter,
> >
> > I am not sure to which comment you refer to here.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Dimitris
> >
> > On Sat, Oct 1, 2016 at 6:32 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider
> > <pfpschneider@gmail.com <mailto:pfpschneider@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> >     Could your provide a pointer to the message from Holger so that the
> full
> >     record of this comment is retained?
> >
> >     Thanks,
> >
> >     peter
> >
> >
> >     On 09/26/2016 02:17 AM, Dimitris Kontokostas wrote:
> >     > Thanks for your feedback Peter,
> >     >
> >     > I moved
> >     >
> >     <https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/commit/
> f80725b162937683cc2f8aaecf497f2e0a3339c8
> >     <https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/commit/
> f80725b162937683cc2f8aaecf497f2e0a3339c8>>
> >     > the recursion definition to section 3.1.1 and adjusted the
> definitions a bit.
> >     > I also made a request to revisit issue-22 since property paths
> already provide
> >     > an easy way to define recursion in SHACL
> >     > https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-data-shapes-wg/
> 2016Sep/0054.html
> >     <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-data-
> shapes-wg/2016Sep/0054.html>
> >     >
> >     > Your comments for recursion on section 9.4 were addressed by
> Holger in a
> >     > separate email
> >     >
> >     > Let me know if this resolves your issue
> >     > Dimitris
> >     >
> >     > On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 8:00 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider
> >     > <pfpschneider@gmail.com <mailto:pfpschneider@gmail.com>
> >     <mailto:pfpschneider@gmail.com <mailto:pfpschneider@gmail.com>>>
> wrote:
> >     >
> >     >     Following up one of the recent responses to my comments on
> Shapes
> >     Constraint
> >     >     Language (SHACL) lead me to look at how recursion works in
> Shapes
> >     Constraint
> >     >     Language (SHACL), W3C Editor's Draft 22 September 2016.
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >     Here is the initial discussion of recursion, from Section
> 4.8.1.
> >     >
> >     >     "A shape may refer to itself directly or indirectly via
> sh:shape,
> >     >     sh:filterShape, etc. Such a shape is said to be recursive. The
> >     meaning of
> >     >     non-recursive shapes is always well-founded. In contrast, the
> >     meaning of a
> >     >     recursive shape may not be well-founded. The handling of
> recursive
> >     shapes in
> >     >     SHACL is left to implementations. Some implementations MAY
> reject shapes
> >     >     graphs containing recursive shape definitions. Some
> implementations MAY
> >     >     report a failure if a recursion has been detected at
> validation time."
> >     >
> >     >     This is the wrong place for the initial discussion of
> recursion.  First,
> >     >     sh:filterShape was discussed much earlier, in Section 2.2.
> Second, the
> >     >     discussion of recursion deserves not to be buried within the
> >     discussion of
> >     >     sh:shape.
> >     >
> >     >     The definition of recursive shapes is much too sloppy.  What is
> >     covered by
> >     >     the "etc."?  Is
> >     >       s:s1 rdf:type sh:Shape ;
> >     >         rdfs:comment s:s1 .
> >     >     a recursive shape?
> >     >
> >     >     What is the process for rejecting a shape graph containing
> recursive
> >     shape
> >     >     definitions?  The term "reject" occurs only in this one place.
> >     >
> >     >     What does well-founded mean here?
> >     >
> >     >     The meaning of "a recursion has been detected at validation
> time" has
> >     >     several problems.  Validation time is not defined.  What
> counts as
> >     detecting
> >     >     a recursion is not defined.
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >     Here is another aspect of recursion in SHACL, from Section 9.4.
> >     >
> >     >     "Recursive use of functions is undefined: If a SPARQL-based
> function
> >     >     contains calls to other functions so that the same function
> with the
> >     same
> >     >     combination of parameters would be visited twice then the
> result of the
> >     >     function call is undefined. An implementation may either
> return no
> >     result
> >     >     (unbound) or terminate the surrounding SPARQL query with an
> error."
> >     >
> >     >     It is not that all recursive use of functions is undefined.
> What is
> >     >     undefined here by the more detailed description is a call to
> the same
> >     >     function and with the same parameters within another call.  It
> >     appears that
> >     >     this is an attempt to prevent infinite recursion.  Such calls,
> >     however, need
> >     >     not lead to infinite recursion if uncaught, even in a limited
> >     language like
> >     >     SPARQL.  Nor is it that all cases of infinite recursion
> involve calls of
> >     >     this sort.  As detecting such calls is neither necessary nor
> >     sufficient to
> >     >     prevent infinite recursion it is puzzling as to why a complex
> and
> >     >     potentially expensive mechanism is being described, and maybe
> even
> >     mandated.
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >     Peter F. Patel-Schneider
> >     >     Nuance Communications
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     > --
> >     > Dimitris Kontokostas
> >     > Department of Computer Science, University of Leipzig & DBpedia
> Association
> >     > Projects: http://dbpedia.org, http://rdfunit.aksw.org,
> >     http://aligned-project.eu
> >     > Homepage: http://aksw.org/DimitrisKontokostas
> >     <http://aksw.org/DimitrisKontokostas>
> >     > Research Group: AKSW/KILT http://aksw.org/Groups/KILT
> >     >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Dimitris Kontokostas
> > Department of Computer Science, University of Leipzig & DBpedia
> Association
> > Projects: http://dbpedia.org, http://rdfunit.aksw.org,
> http://aligned-project.eu
> > Homepage: http://aksw.org/DimitrisKontokostas
> > Research Group: AKSW/KILT http://aksw.org/Groups/KILT
> >
>
>


-- 
Dimitris Kontokostas
Department of Computer Science, University of Leipzig & DBpedia Association
Projects: http://dbpedia.org, http://rdfunit.aksw.org,
http://aligned-project.eu
Homepage: http://aksw.org/DimitrisKontokostas
Research Group: AKSW/KILT http://aksw.org/Groups/KILT

Received on Sunday, 2 October 2016 12:16:34 UTC