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

Re: shapes-ISSUE-118 (syntax errors): syntax errors should not be confusable with validation results [SHACL Spec]

From: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 14:55:13 +1000
To: public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <56A5AAB1.5030200@topquadrant.com>
Yes. But I am not sure what needs to be discussed here on this ticket. 
Do you have a proposal to make, leading to changes in the spec?

Holger


On 23/01/2016 1:04 AM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> The test below was done with separate data and shapes graphs and standard
> settings.  The spec should require that under these conditions the only
> validation results are the product of validation of the data graph.
>
> peter
>
>
> On 01/21/2016 09:58 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote:
>> I think that's an implementation detail. Some engines may test the shapes
>> graph in advance, others may not do that (to save time). I don't think we are
>> prescribing that this test is mandatory. I believe all we need to say is that
>> results are undefined if the shapes graph is invalid. If an engine wants to
>> perform this test then, indeed, it could produce strong runtime errors and
>> stop processing.
>>
>> The results that Peter mentions below were produced because the shapes graph
>> was used as input (data graph) to the validation engine. Therefore, the
>> results look like any other result.
>>
>> Holger
>>
>>
>> On 22/01/2016 5:13 AM, Arthur Ryman wrote:
>>> I'd like to see SHACL errors not mixed in with data validation errors.
>>> We previously agreed that other runtime errors would be reported
>>> separately. Why not report SHACL errors that way too?
>>>
>>> -- Arthur
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 10:06 AM, RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue
>>> Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote:
>>>> shapes-ISSUE-118 (syntax errors): syntax errors should not be confusable
>>>> with validation results [SHACL Spec]
>>>>
>>>> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/118
>>>>
>>>> Raised by: Peter Patel-Schneider
>>>> On product: SHACL Spec
>>>>
>>>> SHACL syntax errors should not be easily confusable with validation results.
>>>>
>>>> Something like the following is not suitable as the report of a syntax error.
>>>>
>>>> [ a       <http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl#ValidationResult> ;
>>>>     <http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl#message>
>>>>             "Required minimum value count 1 but found
>>>> 0"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> ;
>>>>     <http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl#predicate>
>>>>             <http://peoplepetsontology.example.com/pet> ;
>>>>     <http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl#severity>
>>>>             <http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl#Violation> ;
>>>>     <http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl#sourceConstraint>
>>>>             []  ;
>>>>     <http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl#sourceShape>
>>>>             []  ;
>>>>     <http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl#sourceTemplate>
>>>>             <http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl#AbstractMinCountPropertyConstraint>
>>>> ] .
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
Received on Monday, 25 January 2016 04:55:50 UTC

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