Re: question on on shacl semantics

Thank you for your answers.
Here is another question.

Quoting the current version of the spec:

// open quote

In the following example, the property |ex:parent| must have exactly two 
values,
and at least one of them needs to be female.


Example 22: Shape with sh:valueShape constraint

ex:QualifiedValueShapeExampleShape
 a sh:Shape ;
 sh:property [
  sh:predicate ex:parent ;
  sh:minCount 2 ;
  sh:maxCount 2 ;
  sh:qualifiedValueShape [
   a sh:Shape ;   # Optional
   sh:property [
    sh:predicate ex:gender ;
    sh:hasValue ex:female ;
   ]
  ] ;
  sh:qualifiedMinCount 1 ;
 ] .

ex:QualifiedValueShapeExampleValidResource
 ex:parent ex:John ;
 ex:parent ex:Jane .

ex:John
 ex:gender ex:male .

ex:Jane
 ex:gender ex:female .

// close quote

Now my question is: how to specify that there are exactly two parents, 
exactly one is female and exactly one is male.

Thanks in advance,
Iovka




Le 09/09/2015 14:56, Peter F. Patel-Schneider a écrit :
> These all correspond to my understanding of the current state of SHACL.
>
> Closure is with respect to properties that explicitly appear in top-level
> property constraints.  You can fiddle with this by adding in vacuous
> constraints for the other properties or by using sh:ignoredProperties.
> See http://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/shacl/#ClosedShape for more information.
>
> peter
>
> On 09/09/2015 05:41 AM, Simon Steyskal wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> I've tested it with TBC (there might have been some changes to SHACL that
>> haven't been implemented in TBC yet):
>>
>> 1) fails -> 2x "Invalid triple for closed shape", one for ex:a "value1"; and
>> one for ex:b "value2";
>> 2) fails -> 1x "Invalid triple for closed shape", for ex:b "value2";
>> 3) no, doesn't constrain anything
>>
>> cheers,
>> simon
>>
>> ---
>> DDipl.-Ing. Simon Steyskal
>> Institute for Information Business, WU Vienna
>>
>> www: http://www.steyskal.info/  twitter: @simonsteys
>>
>> Am 2015-09-09 14:29, schrieb Iovka Boneva:
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> I'm trying to clarify (for myself) the SHACL semantics.
>>>
>>> Here are three examples, can somebody please tell me whether these
>>> examples pass or fail for the corresponding data.
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance,
>>> Iovka
>>>
>>> // Example 1: is the ex:Instance node valid for that shape ?
>>>
>>> ex:ClosedShapeExampleShape
>>>      a sh:Shape ;
>>>      sh:constraint [
>>>          a sh:ClosedShapeConstraint ;
>>>      ] ;
>>>             sh:constraint [
>>>          a sh:OrConstraint ;
>>>          sh:shapes (
>>>              [
>>>                  sh:property [
>>>                      sh:predicate ex:a ;
>>>                      sh:minCount 1 ;
>>>                  ]
>>>              ]
>>>              [
>>>                  sh:property [
>>>                      sh:predicate ex:b ;
>>>                      sh:minCount 1 ;
>>>                  ]
>>>              ]
>>>          )
>>>      ] ;
>>>      sh:property [
>>>          sh:predicate ex:c ;
>>>      ] .
>>>
>>>
>>> ex:Instance
>>>      ex:a "value1";
>>>      ex:b "value2";
>>>      ex:c "value3";
>>>
>>> __________________________
>>>
>>> // Example 2: is the ex:Instance node valid for that shape ?
>>>
>>> ex:ClosedShapeExampleShape
>>>      a sh:Shape ;
>>>      sh:constraint [
>>>          a sh:ClosedShapeConstraint ;
>>>      ] ;
>>>             sh:constraint [
>>>          a sh:OrConstraint ;
>>>          sh:shapes (
>>>              [
>>>                  sh:property [
>>>                      sh:predicate ex:a ;
>>>                      sh:maxCount 0 ;
>>>                  ]
>>>              ]
>>>              [
>>>                  sh:property [
>>>                      sh:predicate ex:b ;
>>>                      sh:minCount 1 ;
>>>                  ]
>>>              ]
>>>          )
>>>      ] ;
>>>      sh:property [
>>>          sh:predicate ex:a ;
>>>      ] ;
>>>      sh:property [
>>>          sh:predicate ex:c ;
>>>      ] .
>>>
>>>
>>> ex:Instance
>>>      ex:a "value1";
>>>      ex:b "value2";
>>>      ex:c "value3".
>>>
>>>
>>> ______________________
>>>
>>> // Example 3: Is this constraining something ? Is this valid for every node ?
>>>
>>> ex:AShape
>>>      a sh:Shape ;
>>>      sh:property [
>>>          sh:predicate ex:a ;
>>>      ] ;
>>>      sh:property [
>>>          sh:predicate ex:c ;
>>>      ] .
>>
>>



-- 
Iovka Boneva
Associate professor (MdC) Université de Lille
http://www.cristal.univ-lille.fr/~boneva/
+33 6 95 75 70 25