- From: Simon Steyskal <simon.steyskal@wu.ac.at>
- Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 13:11:29 +0200
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
- Cc: public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org
> You may have missed: > > The core vocabulary includes an instance of sh:ClosedShapeConstraint > called > sh:Closed that can be used in places where no other arguments such as > sh:ignoredProperties are needed. you are totally right, thanks for the pointer! Anyway, since Karen's examples use e.g. sh:nodeshape the verbose representation should be used, right? regards, simon --- DDipl.-Ing. Simon Steyskal Institute for Information Business, WU Vienna www: http://www.steyskal.info/ twitter: @simonsteys Am 2015-10-01 12:52, schrieb Peter F. Patel-Schneider: > On 10/01/2015 03:36 AM, Simon Steyskal wrote: > > [...] >> >> 1) To indicate that a shape should be interpreted as a closed shape >> you have >> to use: >> >> ex:ClosedShapeExampleShape >> a sh:Shape ; >> sh:constraint [ >> a sh:ClosedShapeConstraint ; >> sh:ignoredProperties (sh:nodeShape rdf:type) ; >> ] ; >> sh:property [ >> .... >> >> and not "sh:constraint sh:Closed ;" see [1] >> (unless we've agreed on some abbreviated representation I'm not aware >> of) > > [...] > > You may have missed: > > The core vocabulary includes an instance of sh:ClosedShapeConstraint > called > sh:Closed that can be used in places where no other arguments such as > sh:ignoredProperties are needed. > > although sh:Closed does not work the same way as your example does. > > peter
Received on Thursday, 1 October 2015 11:11:56 UTC