- From: Irene Polikoff <irene@topquadrant.com>
- Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 11:17:36 -0400
- To: RDF Data Shapes Working Group <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
One obvious use case for conjunction is something like: :age greater than 4 :age less than 19 Or :deathYear integer :deathYear less than 2016 :deathYear not less than :birthYear Another is a combination of a cardinality constraint and the value constraint on the same predicate. Irene Polikoff On 9/24/15, 10:53 AM, "RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker" <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote: >shapes-ISSUE-92 (additive repeated properties): Should repeated >properties be interpreted as additive or conjunctive? [SHACL Spec] > >http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/92 > >Raised by: Eric Prud'hommeaux >On product: SHACL Spec > >Dublin Core experience suggests that users expect multiple constraints on >the same property to be "additive". For example > ><BFPersonInterface1> sh:property > [ sh:predicate bf:identifiedBy ; sh:pattern "^http://id.loc.gov/" ] , > [ sh:predicate bf:identifiedBy ; sh:pattern "^http://viaf.org/" ] . > >would be interpreted as requiring one bf:identifiedBy arc starting >with "http://id.loc.gov/" and another starting with >"http://viaf.org/". > >The current SHACL behavior is that multiple property constraints on >the same predicate are "conjunctive", meaning that any triple with >that predicate is expected to match all of property constraints. Are >there use cases for this? > > > >
Received on Thursday, 24 September 2015 15:18:09 UTC