Re: shapes-ISSUE-150 (nested severities): Treatment of nested severities [SHACL Spec]

I believe the currently specified policy is just fine. In the example 
below, the resulting severity is sh:Warning if ex:p3 is violated (the 
other constraint may only ever return a warning). It is IMHO a perfectly 
valid use case to report a warning if a certain property value violates 
its constraints.

Holger


On 18/04/2016 20:50, RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
> shapes-ISSUE-150 (nested severities): Treatment of nested severities [SHACL Spec]
>
> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/150
>
> Raised by: Dimitris Kontokostas
> On product: SHACL Spec
>
> It is currently not defined (nor there is a WG decision) how nested severities work in SHACL
>
> for example which severity will be returned if ex:p1 fails due to ex:p2 or due to ex:p3
>
> ex:TopShape a sh:Shape
> sh:property [
>    sh:predicate ex:p1
>    sh:severity sh:Warning ;
>    sh:valueShape [
>      a sh:Shape
>      sh:property [
>        sh:predicate ex:p2
>        sh:severity sh:Info ;
>        #.. constraints
>      ]
>      sh:property [
>        sh:predicate ex:p3
>        sh:severity sh:Violation ;
>        #.. constraints
>      ]
>    ]
> ]
>
> Options:
> proposal 1: take into account only the top severity and ignore all nested severities even if top severity is not defined (default to sh:Violation)
>
> proposal 2:take into account only the child severities and ignore the top one
>
> proposal 3: take into account only the top severity only if the child severity is lower, otherwise use the child severity.
>
>
>

Received on Tuesday, 19 April 2016 06:30:13 UTC