Re: shapes-ISSUE-112 (misuse of RDFS properties): SHACL uses RDFS properties in ways that violate their intended RDFS meaning [SHACL Spec]

It would be ex:someProperty, not the [...] that is the value of sh:property.

In RDFS, rdfs:label and rdfs:comment are supposed to be about the [...].  The
current non-conforming SHACL use is for ex:Property in the context of
ex:InLinePropertyConstraintExampleShape.

Note that in RDF there is no problem in having properties also be nodes in the
graph. In RDFS properties are generally nodes in the graph so that they can be
given domains and ranges, etc.

peter

On 11/06/2015 11:39 AM, Karen Coyle wrote:
> Does "for the property in the scope where it appears" refer to sh:property or
> ex:someProperty in the example? It cannot be ex:someProperty because that
> isn't a rdf:Resource in the graph -- it's never a subject of a triple. All of
> the predicates in the sh:property [...] graph have sh:property as their subject.
> 
> Now I'm fully confused about the whole sh:property graph and what the
> predicates in the graph mean. I should probably take a walk and think about it
> later.
> 
> kc
> 
> On 11/6/15 9:40 AM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
>> rdfs:label and rdfs:comment are supposed to be about the resource itself,
>> which for SHACL is a constraint or shape.  However, the wording in SHACL says
>> to make them about the property, which is different from the constraint or
>> shape.
>>
>> For example, the SHACL example is
>>
>> ex:InlinePropertyConstraintExampleShape
>>     a sh:Shape ;
>>     sh:property [
>>         sh:predicate ex:someProperty ;
>>         sh:minCount 1 ;
>>         sh:valueClass ex:SomeClass ;
>>         rdfs:label "some property" ;
>>         rdfs:comment "This is used for some purpose" ;
>>     ] .
>>
>> where as it really should be
>>
>> ex:InlinePropertyConstraintExampleShape
>>     a sh:Shape ;
>>     sh:property [
>>         sh:predicate ex:someProperty ;
>>         sh:minCount 1 ;
>>         sh:valueClass ex:SomeClass ;
>>         rdfs:label "ex:someProperty constraint in
>> ex:InlinePropertyConstraintExampleShape" ;
>>         rdfs:comment "This constrains values of ex:someProperty to belong to
>> ex:someClass" ;
>>     ] .
>>
>> peter
>>
>>
>> On 11/06/2015 07:40 AM, Karen Coyle wrote:
>>> Peter, this is a bit overly subtle for me. Can you say what exactly you see as
>>> violating RDFS? I'll tell you what I see and you can tell me how I'm wrong ;-)
>>> - when a property is itself a resource (X rdfs:label Y) then this has the RDFS
>>> meaning. What I see is that the resource that is named with rdfs:label in the
>>> case of SHACL is the blank node.
>>>
>>> Now, what's the real problem? I assume it's not just wording.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> kc
>>>
>>> On 11/5/15 3:57 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote:
>>>> I had long thought about using new properties such as sh:label and
>>>> sh:definition instead. I decided to prefer rdfs:label and rdfs:comment,
>>>> because these properties are most likely already used as annotations on
>>>> the shapes, classes and other resources in SHACL files. People will get
>>>> confused which property to use in which context, adding just another
>>>> unnecessary complication in the learning curve.
>>>>
>>>> Since a property constraint resource describes the use of a property in
>>>> the context of a shape scope, I see no reason why using rdfs:label would
>>>> violate the official spec.
>>>>
>>>> PROPOSAL: Close ISSUE-112 - no change required.
>>>>
>>>> Holger
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 11/6/2015 7:55, RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
>>>>> shapes-ISSUE-112 (misuse of RDFS properties): SHACL uses RDFS
>>>>> properties in ways that violate their intended RDFS meaning [SHACL Spec]
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/112
>>>>>
>>>>> Raised by: Peter Patel-Schneider
>>>>> On product: SHACL Spec
>>>>>
>>>>> >From http://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/shacl/:
>>>>>
>>>>> Property constraints may have an rdfs:label to provide a
>>>>> human-readable label for the property in the scope where it appears.
>>>>>
>>>>> >From http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/
>>>>>
>>>>> rdfs:label is an instance of rdf:Property that may be used to provide
>>>>> a human-readable version of a resource's name.  A triple of the form:
>>>>> R rdfs:label L . states that L is a human readable label for R.
>>>>>
>>>>> The SHACL use does not abide by the RDFS meaning.  SHACL should not
>>>>> use RDFS properties in ways that violate their RDFS meaning.
>>>>>
>>>>> Similarly for rdfs:comment.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> PROPOSAL:  Remove the non-conforming wording for and uses of
>>>>> rdfs:label and rdfs:commment.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>

Received on Saturday, 7 November 2015 04:24:45 UTC