Re: shapes-ISSUE-41 (property paths (sh:path?)): Using property paths to refer to values/types? [SHACL Spec]

Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com> wrote on 04/07/2015 01:59:58 AM:

> ...
> 
> I think the "core vocabulary" should remain as simple as possible while 
> addressing a good chunk of use cases. Path expressions would make it too 

> hard for many tools (such as UI form builders) to make sense of SHACL 
> models.

I think this is a question we will need to look into. I'm puzzled by your 
position on this. On the one hand you're saying the core should be kept as 
simple as possible on the other when we talked about separating the core 
from the rest you argued that it didn't make sense because the core wasn't 
useful enough on its own anyway.
>From my point of view, the jury is still out on what the high level 
functionality ought to cover.

--
Arnaud  Le Hors - Senior Technical Staff Member, Open Web Technologies - 
IBM Software Group

> Your specific scenario is easily represented either as a SPARQL 
> constraint or generalized into a template that uses a SPARQL query. In 
> fact we have exactly that template in SPIN, which would accordingly be 
> written in SHACL such as:
> 
> ex:Track a rdfs:Class;
>    sh:constraint [
>      a my:LessThanOtherPropertyConstraint ;
>      my:property sh:kmLeft ;
>      my:otherProperty sh:kmRight ;
>    ] .
> 
> 
> I am pretty certain that a library of such templates would emerge soon, 
> without us necessarily having to do anything.
> 
> >
> > simon
> >
> > (In Section [1.3] there is still a reference to a property called 
> sh:path which seems to be outdated?)
> >
> > [1.3] 
http://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/shacl/#introduction-overview-advanced
> 
> Thanks, that example is fixed now.
> 
> Holger
> 
>