- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 18:14:28 -0800
- To: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>, public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org
That is not sufficient because there are several sources of information input into SHACL. For example, is a node an instance of a class for scoping if the rdf:type triple is in the shapes graph, or do only triples in the data graph count for this? peter On 01/14/2016 03:14 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote: > The spec currently has section 1.1 where we state that certain terms from RDFS > are used with slightly different meaning in the SHACL spec. Maybe, to satisfy > the issue you raise below, we could expand this section a little bit to > clarify that "being in instance" means something like > > ASK { > $type rdfs:subClassOf* ?class . > $instance a ?class . > } > > Then, "being a class" means $type=rdfs:Class and "being a shape" means > $type=sh:Shape. > > Would this help? > > Holger > > > On 15/01/2016 2:09 AM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: >> SHACL currently depends on the answers to several class-based questions, >> including >> - when is a node a class >> - when is a node a shape >> - when is a node an instance of a class >> but how these are determined is not completely spelled out in the SHACL >> documment. >> >> I think that there needs to be a complete definition of these relationships in >> the SHACL document and test cases to back up the definition. >> >> peter >> > >
Received on Friday, 15 January 2016 02:15:00 UTC