Re: using classes to control constraints

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1



On 02/10/2015 03:59 AM, Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote:
> 
[...]
> 
> 3/ There is some wording that introduces the notion of verifying that 
> sufficient information is present so that useful things can be done with
> 
>> the
> RDF data.
> 
>> I think I can address this with a "record class" as described in 
>> <http://www.w3.org/2015/02/shapes-article/> (many thanks for your 
>> feedback on that document).

Better but I still don't understand why you are picking on cardinalities.


> 4/ A set of constraints/shapes are given whose effect is that if the
> data correctly validates the bug instances do indeed have sufficient
>> information.
> These constraints/shapes are triggered off the bug class.
> 
>> http://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/data-shapes-primer/no-class-templates.html#associations
>>
>> 
now includes a whole slew of associations with shapes,


That's looking better.  I would change the section heading to something more
like "Controlling Shape Validation" and limit "instance" to where you are
talking about instances of classes, using "object" or "node" elsewhere.



the first of
>> which is ldom:instanceShape, second is ldom:classShape (editorially 
>> made sense in that order).
> 
>> [[ clinic:PatientRecord a owl:Class ; ldom:classShape [ ldom:property
>> [ ldom:predicate clinic:phone ; ldom:valueType xsd:string ; 
>> ldom:minCount 1 ; ldom:maxCount 1 ] ] . ]]
> 
>> Is that good enough for an FPWD to tell the world what we're up to?
> 
> 
> I believe that this example satisfies all your desiderata above.
> 
> peter
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJU2flFAAoJECjN6+QThfjzb5UH+wUUDBuJLbliXj8M5YEqnNAM
yPtKn7Y7EwVSSqDFEV3RVDRLV20DyNNGf88lLl+LyqwM2SqEdzSR5v0hUkche6iy
KncMzhzzoYOCSCkPhcfqkW4IzBZCPJZsUz8IjDFhAEqsg0jFaB6QvGgI8QIJDyBV
CLqISLZuwujyydvutNZHaRQ6G68uoTKBHtkQiiCtz7Rpu8WLyQW5J06ayqKRKMNM
L/ksK3To12K249ZvSGfI1WK1Vd366/M4GiaQlVYyQsTZCEr7WSznX4sCfjqNZzmG
0Bbp1Z2rSsuj9GItQ7/hko8CVMYrFFDJrDN+ZLIfluuaQCssvSphMVuR9quZTnc=
=5845
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Received on Tuesday, 10 February 2015 12:28:18 UTC