- From: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
- Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2016 14:55:01 +1000
- To: public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org
Peter, in order to better understand how your algorithm works, would you be able to share some examples of the SPARQL that gets generated? Also, I assume you have some non-trivial test cases - these may be valuable resources for the WG in general. (Regardless of whether the WG decided to generally recommend a SPARQL-transformation approach, there certainly would be value in exploring this possibility, e.g. as a WG note or in papers). Thanks, Holger On 23/03/2016 3:22, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > I put together an implementation of core SHACL with my syntax proposal. It is > available at https://github.com/pfps/shacl > > There is a single python 2.7 file that can be called as > python shacl.py data shapes > to validate the data graph against the shapes graph and print the validation > reports. > > This implements my proposed syntax but there is also code that will handle > most of the differences between the two syntaxes. > > This implementation is a pure transformation to SPARQL. A SHACL shape is > transformed into a SPARQL query and the solutions in the result set are the > violations of the shape. > > There are a few differences between this implementation and the current spec > besides the syntax differences. There is no translation from the result set > to a graph. The subject, predicate, and object come from where the violation > was detected. Severities may be handled slightly differently. > > > peter >
Received on Tuesday, 12 April 2016 04:55:37 UTC