- From: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
- Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2016 09:02:19 +1000
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>, public-rdf-shapes@w3.org
Since that "shape" would not have any constraints (as it cannot be the subject of any triple), nothing would happen. Holger On 28/09/2016 8:53, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > So this is legal SHACL then? What happens if this shape is used in SHACL? > > > Peter F. Patel-Schneider > Nuance Communications > > On 09/27/2016 03:44 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote: >> The rdfs:range of sh:shape is sh:Shape, and the "Value Type" is sh:Shape, too. >> None of these enforce formal syntactic constraints. We could add a sh:nodeKind >> restriction to sh:shape in the SHACL.ttl file, but haven't done so for other >> properties either. >> >> Holger >> >> >> On 28/09/2016 4:01, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: >>> It appears to me that >>> >>> [prefix declarations] >>> >>> s:s1 rdf:type sh:Shape ; >>> sh:shape 7 . >>> >>> is a syntactically correct shapes graph. >>> >>> Is this so? If not, what makes it not be so? >>> >>> >>> Peter F. Patel-Schneider >>> Nuance Communications >>> >>
Received on Tuesday, 27 September 2016 23:02:52 UTC