- From: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
- Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 08:55:29 +1000
- To: public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org
On 12/16/2014 7:18, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> SPIN constraints are always (I think) associated with classes.
SPIN constraints can be global, only syntactically attached to
rdfs:Resource but executed without any binding of ?this. In a future
version of SPIN I think this should be cleaned up, with global
("static") constraints being stand-alone objects.
> However, there is no need for a SPIN document to contain an ontology.
> I don't think that SPIN can handle OWL ontologies anyway, only RDF
> classes.
SPIN constraints can be attached to any class, including owl:Classes or
instances of other subclasses of rdfs:Class.
Other parts of OWL can be handled in SPIN via generic constraint and
template libraries, e.g. to search for owl:minCardinality restrictions
in the superclasses. Prototypes for such a mapping exist.
Holger
Received on Monday, 15 December 2014 22:58:32 UTC