Re: shapes-ISSUE-23 (punning): Shapes, classes and punning [SHACL Spec]

On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 6:17 PM, Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
wrote:

> > On 3 Apr 2015, at 14:31, Dimitris Kontokostas <
> kontokostas@informatik.uni-leipzig.de> wrote:
> >
> > In this case, how should we re-formulate the example in 1.2 [1] so that
> a shacl engine does not get confused and consider ex:SubmitterShape as a
> class?
>
> Why would it be a problem to consider ex:SubmitterShape a class?
>

I am trying to understand how a shacl engine could distinguish a
class-shape from a ShEx-shape with punning (or with something similar to
punning).
If I got it right after your explanation to Peter, with your suggestion
anything that is an rdfs:Class can be considered a class-shape by default
(or if is contains an sh:constraint/sh:property) and anything that is an
sh:Shape and not an rdfs:Class is a ShEx-like shape.
In this case the shacl engine should take into consideration only what
exists in the constraint graph and not dereference the ShEx-shape IRI to
check if it is defined as an rdfs:Class elsewhere, right?

Best,
Dimitris


>
> Best,
> Richard
>
>
> >
> > [1] http://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/shacl/#introduction-overview
> >
> >
> > Richard
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Dimitris Kontokostas
> > Department of Computer Science, University of Leipzig
> > Research Group: http://aksw.org
> > Homepage:http://aksw.org/DimitrisKontokostas
>
>
>


-- 
Dimitris Kontokostas
Department of Computer Science, University of Leipzig
Research Group: http://aksw.org
Homepage:http://aksw.org/DimitrisKontokostas