- From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 07:44:44 -0800
- To: public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org
On 11/11/15 8:21 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote: > That sounds OK to me. I believe we should aim at a situation in which > these two files can be mixed/overlaid without any ill side effects. > Basically, the SHACL file can add triples to the URIs defined in the > base vocab. I believe the vocab file could simply be a list of URIs, > possibly with rdf:type triples, rdfs:subClassOf, rdfs:labels and > rdfs:comments. I don't think anything else is needed. At least ranges, which aid in correct use of the properties. kc > > I had already implemented an automatic documentation generator in our > previous round on this topic. > > Holger > > > On 11/12/15 2:04 PM, Arthur Ryman wrote: >> I propose the following: >> >> 1. We should publish two normative files: shacl-vocab.ttl and >> shacl-shacl.ttl >> >> 2. shacl-vocab.ttl should be a simple RDFS vocabulary that does not >> contain any shape information. It should be readable by anyone >> knowledgeable in RDFS, but not SHACL >> >> 3. shacl-shacl.ttl should use SHACL to define the shape of valid SHACL >> documents >> >> 4. both files should also be automatically transformed to HTML, e.g. >> as in [3]. There exists XSLT for transforming RDFS vocabularies >> [4].This transform could be reimplemented in Javascript and integrated >> with ReSpec. A similar transform could be developed for SHACL >> documents. >> >> 5. W3C should host these files and support Turtle/HTML content >> negotiation as per [1] and [2]. >> >> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/cooluris/ >> [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-vocab-pub/ >> [3] https://jazz.net/wiki/bin/view/LinkedData/JazzProcessVocabulary >> [4] https://jazz.net/wiki/bin/view/LinkedData/PublishingRdfVocabularies >> >> -- Arthur >> > > > -- Karen Coyle kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
Received on Thursday, 12 November 2015 15:45:16 UTC