Re: shapes-ISSUE-132 (sh:predicate in constraints): sh:predicate is used in many constraints but not always available [SHACL - Core]

I have meanwhile reworked chapter 3 so that it can be understood for all 
three contexts. Peter, could you check if this ISSUE-132 is now addressed?

Holger


On 8/03/2016 10:03, Holger Knublauch wrote:
> Yes, this aspect of the spec really needs a thorough update. The whole 
> structure still assumes Property Constraints only. I had been waiting 
> on the resolution to the metamodel before cleaning this generalization 
> up. I had put a red TODO block above the table in 3.1 to clarify this 
> construction site.
>
> Note that this chapter is work in progress to implement the resolution 
> to ISSUE-98. In a nutshell, these constraint types can be used either 
> at sh:constraint (to apply to the focus node itself), at sh:property 
> (to apply to all values of a given property), or at sh:inverseProperty 
> (to apply to all inverse values of a given property). Which 
> combinations are supported is summarized in the following table. The 
> flow of the sub-sections needs to be adjusted and generalized accordingly.
>
> Holger
>
>
> On 8/03/2016 9:51, RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
>> shapes-ISSUE-132 (sh:predicate in constraints): sh:predicate is used in many constraints but not always available [SHACL - Core]
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/132
>>
>> Raised by: Peter Patel-Schneider
>> On product: SHACL - Core
>>
>>
>> The SHACL spec currently defines several constraints, including sh:class,
>> with wording like
>>
>> **************
>> A validation result must be produced for each triple that has the focus node
>> as its subject, the sh:predicate as its predicate and where ...
>> **************
>>
>> However, there might not be any predicate involved at all, for example where
>> a sh:class is in a sh:constraint constraint in a shape that is invoked directly from a scope.
>>
>>
>>
>