Re: ISSUE-23: A proposal to not mingle shapes and classes

I also support this approach as a direct association of a shape to a class.
Indirection comes when we try to guess it from other triples associated
with the shape resource.

Best,
Dimitris
On Apr 29, 2015 03:33, "Michel Dumontier" <michel.dumontier@stanford.edu>
wrote:

> 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-----
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>