+1 as well for consistency - if nothing is stated, then it is unconstrained. This is how everything else works in shapes. I also think having 1,1 default is likely to result in more verbose shapes. But this is a minor point compared to consistency. Sent from my iPhone > On Sep 28, 2015, at 3:02 AM, Dimitris Kontokostas <kontokostas@informatik.uni-leipzig.de> wrote: > > > >> On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 1:17 AM, Arthur Ryman <arthur.ryman@gmail.com> wrote: >> I vote -1 to defining optional values for any constraint. >> >> The current design is consistent in its treatment of absent >> constraints, namely that they do not lead to any checks. It is >> therefore inconsistent to say that if minCount or maxCount are absent >> then they are in effect present with some default value. If is >> especially inconsistent to assign default values that give a result >> different than if the constraints were absent. > > I agree with Arthur here, all constraints should be explicitly stated in the SHACL graph. > > - Dimitris > > > > -- > Dimitris Kontokostas > Department of Computer Science, University of Leipzig & DBpedia Association > Projects: http://dbpedia.org, http://http://aligned-project.eu, http://rdfunit.aksw.org > Homepage:http://aksw.org/DimitrisKontokostas > Research Group: http://aksw.org >
Received on Monday, 28 September 2015 14:13:48 UTC