Re: rdfdatashapestracker-ISSUE-3 (Shape association): How is a shape associated with a graph?

On 11/18/2014 09:17 AM, RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
> rdfdatashapestracker-ISSUE-3 (Shape association): How is a shape associated with a graph?
>
> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/3
>
> Raised by: Arnaud Le Hors
> On product:
>
> There has been quite a bit of discussion about how a shape is associated with an instance graph. Some technologies rely on a type but this isn't accepted by all as sufficient to address all use cases. So, what are the ways a shape can be associated with a graph?


As far as I can see there are only a few potential mechanisms for associating 
some constraints with an RDF graph.  (This is separate from determining which 
part of the RDF graph the constraint acts on, by the way.)

1/ The constraint could be in the graph itself.

2/ There could be an explicit connection between the graph and a source for 
the constraint.  This would work something like owl:imports, but the source 
would not have to be an ontology document.  The connection could also be 
indirect, e.g., the graph owl:imports an ontology document which is itself 
explicitly connected to a constraint document.

3/ There could be an implicit connection between the graph and a source for 
the constraint.  This could be something like "follow your nose", i.e., the 
graph has a node whose IRI can be turned into a URL that points at a source 
for the constraint.  This connection could also be indirect.

4/ The constraint validation mechanism could take multiple arguments, one of 
which is an RDF graph and another of which contains constraints.  In this 
mechanism, as opposed to the other three, there is no way of navigating from 
the RDF graph to the constraint.


Some proposals naturally or easily work with several of the above mechanisms.


peter

Received on Tuesday, 2 December 2014 19:59:00 UTC