Re: Validation entry points (was: Shapes vs Classes (in LDOM))

On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 6:06 AM, Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
wrote:

>
> On 1/24/15, 11:36 PM, Dimitris Kontokostas wrote:
>
>> I think this is getting off-topic and leaning towards constraint
>> discovery. In the same way one can define different (ShExC/RS)shapes in
>> different datasets one can also define different class constraints in
>> different datasets.
>>
>> I think Holger's point was about the constraint definition. As also Peter
>> pointed out we have requirements for three types of constraints
>> 1) Constraints on instances of a class
>> 2) Global constraints and
>> 3) Shape constraints in the way ShEXc & RS define them
>> Holger's suggestion probably has good coverage for 1 & 2 but needs
>> further input for 3.
>>
>
> Yes, exactly. I need more input on how the stand-alone shapes are supposed
> to be used. This takes us to the question how does the validation start.
> LDOM has two starting points:
>

IMHO we should make the validation entry point flexible enough to handle
different cases both for the current requirements and for future extensions.
Maybe it is easier if, for now, we focused only on how one can define
different types of constraints. The RS submission does something similar
and focuses mainly on the shape definitions.
Of course I might be wrong here so feel free to correct me.

Dimitris


>
> a) Does ?resource match the constraints attached to ?shape:
>     ldom:violatesConstraints(?resource, ?shape) : xsd:boolean
>
> b) Does the current graph contain any constraint violations?
>
> Both use rdf:type triples to link resources with their supposed shapes,
> and ldom:GlobalConstraints are executed in b) only. I need to better
> understand how the process is started in ShEx and Resource Shapes, and
> which auxiliary triples are needed for that. I can see oslc:instanceShape
>
> http://www.w3.org/Submission/2014/SUBM-shapes-20140211/#instanceShape
>
> which has almost exactly the same role as rdf:type in the current LDOM
> draft.
>
> Thanks,
> Holger
>
>
>


-- 
Dimitris Kontokostas
Department of Computer Science, University of Leipzig
Research Group: http://aksw.org
Homepage:http://aksw.org/DimitrisKontokostas