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

Re: ISSUE-23 implicit scopeClass text updated

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 06:58:07 -0800
To: Arthur Ryman <arthur.ryman@gmail.com>, "public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org" <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <56A2437F.3070804@gmail.com>


On 01/21/2016 06:57 PM, Arthur Ryman wrote:
> As per the discussion today. See [1].
> 
> [1] http://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/shacl/#definition-of-implicit-scopeClass
> 
> -- Arthur



The relevant text is, I believe:


A SHACL processor MUST recognize a resource X in the shapes graph as a shape
if and only if the shapes graph contains a triple X rdf:type S where S is
either sh:Shape or S is connected to sh:Shape by a property path in the shapes
graph consisting of one or more triples whose predicate is rdfs:subClassOf.
Similarly, a SHACL processor MUST recognize a resource X in the shapes graph
as a class if and only if the shapes graph contains a triple X rdf:type C
where C is either rdfs:Class or C is connected to rdfs:Class by a property
path in the shapes graph consisting of one or more triples whose predicate is
rdfs:subClassOf. If a SHACL processor recognizes a resource X in the shapes
graph as both a shape and a class as defined here then all instances of the
class X in the data graph MUST be included in the scope of the shape X. For
the purposes of this definition, a resource R in the data graph is said to be
an instance of the resource X if and only if the data graph contains a triple
R rdf:type X or the data graph contains a triple R rdf:type Y and Y is
connected to X by a property path in the data graph consisting of one or more
triples whose predicate is rdfs:subClassOf.


Quite a mouthful, but this appears to do the trick.

This may, however, upset some of the "implicit typing" simplifications
elsewhere in the document, such as

11. Validation of shapes graphs and the sh:defaultValueType property
Example 8
Example 27
Example 28

The first mention of what is a shape is right at the beginning of Section 2.
The relevant text above is quite a bit later, which should be remedied.



The comment

Issue 23: Use of shapes graph versus data graph for metadata
We should be consistent here. We put shape information in the shapes graph.
Class information should also be in the shapes graph, especially for designers
who couple shapes and classes. Both shapes and classes are kinds of metadata
so they should be in the same graph.

should probably be removed, but I do agree that the early examples should not
use a combined data and shapes graph.



peter
Received on Friday, 22 January 2016 14:58:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:30:29 UTC