- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 17:51:09 -0700
- To: "public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org" <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 I propose that there be no mingling of RDFS classes and shapes, constraints, or anything else in the SHACL specification. This proposal, I believe, is consonant with Stardog ICV, with Shape Expressions, and with Resource Shapes. Selection of which nodes to verify would be done using mechanisms different from those used in RDFS, although some selection would interact with RDFS classes and properties. One specific set of mechanisms that work this way can be found in https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/Shacl-sparql where there are several kinds of scoping links that say which nodes are to be checked against a shape. One of these kinds of scoping links links to a class, and requires all instances of the class be checked against a shape. So for checking that all people's parents are people one could* say: [ sh:classScope ex:Person ; sh:shape [ sh:predicate ex:parent ; sh:valueType ex:Person ] ] peter * This is written in the representationally relaxed variant. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJVQCr9AAoJECjN6+QThfjz3vcIANEl+Zjrp6eOri6cA66e5Yk5 gvI/N3/1bf4UxNJyLmHPp8diqHKo97ZcRD4lZw/Haf6hsGoTEpThlNBKaCXTwpv0 QZJzJHcyR+9thYmSbFElUVVu9cWH2sHakHANCbyXzmVbuemfGDfVdu3ud3V/QlP1 Br5k+PSIPRImVWXGszC9/32HmP/l41Wu6nEcExsz3FjrR1xAhGHeavdONifjhBaU pLBnp4AkNkkHzhmXPLKevgokmx3vZ/WztTfc2YUhZNvueY4utaM4RTKzGkmT8uSe CzK6p1Svr9jeJ6ecEqqCxw3NvhYlkZ94+iI4wQtxMIGhkKmyjSJlQk2yoVokBVM= =txRC -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Wednesday, 29 April 2015 00:51:39 UTC