Re: using classes to control constraints

Hi,
  i would like to have shapes to be compatible with OWL entailment.  For instance, if I place a superclass in a constraint, i would like to validate positive where i have a subclass in the data.  But I see that as a choice that should be specified with the shape, as I could imagine that you might also want to validate with only the specified class.

m



> On Feb 11, 2015, at 8:16 PM, Irene Polikoff <irene@topquadrant.com> wrote:
> 
> There is no interaction with entailment or querying. The data is what it is.
> 
> Constraints describe what the data should be in order to pass the validation. They are used to validate the data that is available. They don't change the data.
> 
>> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 7:38 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com> wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 02/11/2015 04:16 PM, Irene Polikoff wrote:
>> > When is it supposed to be checked?
>> >
>> > When constraint checking/data validation is invoked
>> 
>> Only then?  What is the interaction with entailment?  And querying?
>> 
>> > What reporting needs to be done?
>> >
>> > As I recall, there has been a discussion about what should be returned
>> > and a few people provided examples of the kind of reporting they want. It
>> > has been captured in the LDOM document.
>> 
>> That was for explicit invocation of validation.   If type assertions can be
>> made to shapes then I think that much more needs to be done.
>> 
>> > Why are you asking?
>> 
>> Because, explicit typing to shapes needs to be integrated into the rest of
>> RDF, RDFS, and SPARQL.
>> 
>> 
>> peter
>> 
>> >
>> > On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 4:17 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider
>> > <pfpschneider@gmail.com <mailto:pfpschneider@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> >
>> > So there is in an error in an RDF graph.  How is that supposed to work?
>> > When is it supposed to be checked?  What reporting needs to be done?
>> >
>> > peter
>> >
>> >
>> > On 02/11/2015 01:08 PM, Irene Polikoff wrote:
>> >> It is intended for validation and works over data that exists. So, if
>> >> ex:a is not ex:p ex:q, there is an error.
>> >
>> >> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 1:49 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider
>> >> <pfpschneider@gmail.com <mailto:pfpschneider@gmail.com>
>> > <mailto:pfpschneider@gmail.com <mailto:pfpschneider@gmail.com>>> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> On 02/11/2015 10:42 AM, Irene Polikoff wrote:
>> >>> <What would it mean to assert that an object belongs to a shape via
>> >>> an rdf:type link?>
>> >
>> >>> I believe it would mean that constraints defined for the shape apply
>> >>> to the object.
>> >
>> >
>> >> So I can infer things from this assertion?  For example, if ex:shape
>> >> requires that the value of ex:p be ex:q then does ex:a rdf:type
>> >> ex:shape . imply ex:a ex:p ex:q .
>> >
>> >> peter
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> Version: GnuPG v1
>> 
>> iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJU2/X1AAoJECjN6+QThfjztwYH/RGKnTIPGMQrrJb9OtignRAT
>> MNcGm2fkh39D8IpUkoE85JAKzG9NJcvdI74748JJppdUnrJPbCwXWlX9HnNDNOW4
>> lbgTK8Y3eiDr7liavMsK+7ZbuF/QAocAXaWU9dPbwdrCXHFY1jmfY6y1H0KlfvST
>> vvyAh12zhzHFxgksALkxKEvnSaGL6rHlZUoNh6Ke/8gZKn5Z2B0yQJZvkJdVU5sa
>> j1P/BrzLd5QNIUgiSQJklQecXN8sTZt5Cd96ePGlGD6hn9aLnVUKgbNH5BvpMchw
>> z51tUAaXAQFK1RtoRec+PYiJxaXRQ3UK3ZZQ1JsWSIq5350vx16j7jXgyc5+4eg=
>> =8Iey
>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>