W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org > March 2015

Re: How would option b) on the last straw poll of 12 March work?

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2015 12:55:43 -0700
Message-ID: <5505E3BF.5080103@gmail.com>
To: Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>
CC: RDF Data Shapes Working Group <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

A few questions and comments.


Is this the entirety of SHACL or just the core language?  The language here
does not cover closed shapes, exclusive or, global constraints, maximum
cardinality of 0, non-datatype type matching, or datatype facets.

What happens with cardinalities that are not integers, e.g.,
"3.1"^^xsd:double.

Several of the RDF examples don't match the abstract syntax, e.g.,
my:UserShape.

What happens if a node encodes both a property constraint and an and
constraint, or any of the the other combinations?  What happens with
structure sharing, e.g., a sh:property and sh:inverseProperty link to the
same node?

What is the basic operation in SHACL?  Does it take one RDF graph, one RDF
dataset, or multiple RDF graphs and datasets?

What is evaluation of a term?  What happens if there are multiple values?

The specification appears to be ill-founded on recursive shapes over data
loops.  I can't tell for sure because there is no formal basis.




peter


On 03/14/2015 05:34 PM, Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote:
> * Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com> [2015-03-12
> 13:56-0700]
>> There were a number of WG members who voted for: b) The main
>> specification shall include the higher-level language constructs only
>> and the rest shall be defined in add-ons.
>> 
>> Can any one describe how this option would work?  Would there be a
>> single way of defining the meaning of the entire language (main spec
>> and add-ons) or would there be several ways of the defining what
>> constructs mean?
> 
> As a down-payment, I offer
> <http://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/semantics/>. I hope to produce a start
> on an axiomatic semantics and a SPARQL semantics tomorrow.
> 
> 
>> peter
>> 
> 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVBeO+AAoJECjN6+QThfjzACwH/1D1Dn2K4qjKTW/GhagGWg81
jF6jbGZJCruJTXMkHTQ+8QeSLphNNzSNl4OMCXwVZ947TvrOqAfldLKIYfmeTvS5
7PRB56Uq52MSm1PsJvJIO5ilk49++cRjgWOiQb99Tz0lHeWxJl2mDi1K7cHSU/sC
8jy6QW8WHUYSkKZ83oWjcs+t7vp5M282DvB7eeCQLcipLWUW7EabyiV1PvoEyllj
2IznhJrET/2mQfqmakUBSuAzIPM13wUtYblIQipdr7t7CH8kT0Fp5fhixd/6q91N
o4+Sjs+K3WqTnRt0Kz8PeUKBWPSXUhviHTUtkFz8FHVyfdVdUe0ke1OjtW0B9Oo=
=B+xk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Sunday, 15 March 2015 19:56:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:30:17 UTC