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

Re: comments on SHACL 3 March editors draft

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 08:39:51 -0800
To: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>, public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <56DDAED7.3060503@gmail.com>
On 03/06/2016 08:46 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote:
[...]

> On 7/03/2016 6:59, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:

[...]

>> The UML-like diagram is misleading.  It uses rdfs:Resource in a way
>> different from SHACL.
> 
> Do others agree that I should take that diagram out? Could you clarify what is
> wrong about its use of rdfs:Resource?

rdfs:Resource is not a SHACL superclass of sh:Shape or rdfs:Class.

SHACL does not require that the fillers of sh:scopeNode be SHACL instances of
rdfs:Resource.

As well,

SHACL does not require that fillers of rdf:type be SHACL instances of rdfs:Class.

SHACL does not require that fillers of sh:scopeClass be SHACL instances of
rdfs:Class or fillers of sh:filterShape be SHACL instances of sh:Shape
(except, perhaps, when using the default type stuff).

peter
Received on Monday, 7 March 2016 16:40:22 UTC

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