- From: Michel Dumontier <michel.dumontier@stanford.edu>
- Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 18:33:33 -0700
- To: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
- Cc: RDF Data Shapes Working Group <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CALcEXf6ac5Pu4+ToRTxbp+RnijjMozAN0dFB4doOzj7WdyXk1Q@mail.gmail.com>
I support this proposal. I believe it is important that shapes and classes be considered different, and that it is user-defined shapes that may refer to class expressions or other shapes. m. Michel Dumontier, PhD Associate Professor of Medicine (Biomedical Informatics) Stanford University http://dumontierlab.com On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 6:20 PM, Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com> wrote: > Your sh:classScope looks exactly like the sh:classShape used in my > previous email, only in the inverse direction. I don't see how this avoids > mingling between classes and shapes - it just adds a level of indirection. > Selection still happens by rdf:types and rdfs:subClassOf inheritance still > remains meaningful. It's just another syntax for the same concepts. > > Holger > > > > On 4/29/2015 10:51, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > >> -----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 01:34:25 UTC