Re: shapes-ISSUE-134 (knowing inverse): does SHACL syntax distinguish inverse property constraints [SHACL Spec]

On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 3:46 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider <
pfpschneider@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 04/06/2016 10:44 PM, Dimitris Kontokostas wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 3:58 AM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider
> > <pfpschneider@gmail.com <mailto:pfpschneider@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >     >> ex:myConstraint rdfs:subClassOf sh:PropertyConstraint .
> >     >>
> >     >> _:c11 a ex:myConstraint ;
> >     >>       sh:predicate ex:q ;
> >     >>       sh:nodeKind sh:IRI .
> >     >
> >     > We could handle that case either way. We could allow subclasses of
> the system
> >     > constraint classes, or not. I have no strong opinion.
> >     >
> >     > In an attempt to resolve this (better) I have started a new
> section 4.1.1
> >     > Invalid Shapes Graphs:
> >     >
> >     >     http://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/shacl/#shapes-graph-invalid
> >
> >     Oh.  I was just looking at that section as if it had been around
> previously.
> >     Even with that section there are holes.
> >
> >
> > I suggest that we create a (normative) shapes document that can validate
> > shapes graphs and in section 4.1 we reference that document.
> > We say that shapes graphs that do not validate against our shapes
> document are
> > considered invalid..
>
> This would be a reasonable thing to do, if it is possible.
>

Yes, this way we can capture other kinds of invalid shapes that we may
encounter in the future


>
> > What a SHACL engine does with an invalid shapes graph is up to the
> engine to
> > decide. e.g. Virtuoso relaxes the sparql syntax on their endpoint
> interface to
> > make it easier for the users.
> > A SHACL engine could either reject the shapes graph or try to recover
> some
> > errors with some heuristics.
>
> I think that it would be better to require a strict mode where all
> documents
> that are not serializations of valid SHACL shapes graphs are rejected by
> the
> SHACL processor and no validation is done.
>

I have no strong opinion on this


>
> peter
>
>


-- 
Dimitris Kontokostas
Department of Computer Science, University of Leipzig & DBpedia Association
Projects: http://dbpedia.org, http://rdfunit.aksw.org, http://
http://aligned-project.eu
Homepage:http://aksw.org/DimitrisKontokostas
Research Group: AKSW/KILT http://aksw.org/Groups/KILT