W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org > April 2016

Re: implementation of core SHACL (using proposed syntax)

From: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2016 14:55:01 +1000
To: public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <570C7FA5.1070409@topquadrant.com>
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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:30:31 UTC