Re: shapes as classes

On 12/19/14 8:11 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> The narrative for S35 says "There is no path from the
> acc:AccessContextList node to either of the acc:AccessContext nodes.
> There is an implicit containment relation of acc:AccessContext nodes in
> the acc:AccessContextList by virtue of these nodes being in the same
> information resource."  This implicit connection is not part of RDF.

An example would really help here. I have what may be a similar example 
from the Europeana data. I'm not sure if this mailing list takes 
attachments, so the (short) example is here:

http://kcoyle.net/temp/edmtest.ttl

I cut the data down from something with dozens of related files and 
subject headings, but I think I kept the structure intact. The main 
nodes of the model are edm:ProvidedCHO and ore:Aggregation. The data is 
natively in RDF/XML but I have trouble reading that so I converted it to 
TTL.

Q: Is this an example of what is being discussed here?

Thanks,
kc


>
>
> peter
>
>
> On 12/19/2014 06:01 PM, Karen Coyle wrote:
>> DC has at least one similar case, in use today. Can you, however, say
>> what you
>> mean by "some characteristic of two nodes"? What "characteristics"
>> would put
>> them out of scope?
>>
>> kc
>>
>> On 12/19/14 4:12 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
>>> If the only connection is that they are in the same graph, then it might
>>> be in scope.  However, if there is some indication that the connection
>>> is somehow special because of the some characteristic of two nodes that
>>> are both in a particular graph, then I would say that this is out of
>>> scope.
>>>
>>> It appears to me that the latter is the case.
>>>
>>> peter
>>>
>>>
>>> On 12/19/2014 12:42 PM, Arthur Ryman wrote:
>>>> "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com> wrote on 12/19/2014
>>>> 02:40:44 PM:
>>>>
>>>>> From: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
>>>>> To: Arthur Ryman/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA, public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org
>>>>> Date: 12/19/2014 02:41 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: shapes as classes
>>>>>
>>>>> S35 talks about an implicit connection between acc:AcccessContext
>>>>> nodes
>>>> and
>>>>> acc:AccessContextList nodes.  This implicit connection appears to
>>>>> me to
>>>> be
>>>>> outside the scope of RDF.
>>>>>
>>>>> peter
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Peter,
>>>> I think this implicit connection is in scope because the concept of an
>>>> RDF
>>>> graph is within the scope of RDF. The implicit connection between the
>>>> nodes is a consequence of them being in the same RDF graph. A shape
>>>> language should let me describe a constraint such as "The graph must
>>>> have
>>>> exactly one node of type acc:AccessContextList, and zero or nodes of
>>>> type
>>>> acc:AccessContext."
>>>>
>>>> -- Arthur
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

-- 
Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600

Received on Saturday, 20 December 2014 16:23:03 UTC