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

Re: SHACL syntax and metamodel complexity

From: Dimitris Kontokostas <kontokostas@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2016 09:48:29 +0200
Message-ID: <CA+u4+a2whb=HpKFqwxuX0BAYf9jGKwEdNAwjAKeJ1bzWJ8kEBw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Simon Steyskal <simon.steyskal@wu.ac.at>
Cc: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>, public-data-shapes-wg <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
Peter,

could you please post an example with the equivalent of sh:valueShape? e.g.
example 1 from the spec.
Looks like sh:fillers took that role but want to make sure I got this 100%
right

On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 8:17 AM, Simon Steyskal <simon.steyskal@wu.ac.at>
wrote:

> Hi!
>
> as for 2) we may want to consider re-opening issue-41 "Using property
> paths to refer to values/types?" [1]
> (which I would be very very happy about)
>
> [1] https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/41
>
> simon
> ---
> DDipl.-Ing. Simon Steyskal
> Institute for Information Business, WU Vienna
>
> www: http://www.steyskal.info/  twitter: @simonsteys
>
>
> Am 2016-03-09 07:02, schrieb Holger Knublauch:
>
>> I see three main areas of differences between current SHACL and your
>> draft:
>>
>> 1) Shall the concepts Shape and Constraint be merged (syntactic sugar)
>> 2) Shall SHACL constraints support arbitrary property paths instead of
>> property/inverseProperty
>> 3) Shall constraint parameters be limited to a single property only
>>
>> Leaving aside the specific triples, does anyone see other major
>> differences?
>>
>> The ISSUE-133 that you raised is limited to 3) and it may be worth
>> having separate issues for the two other differences, if only to
>> structure the discussion.
>>
>> I do not believe that there are necessary dependencies between these
>> areas, and it would IMHO be more fruitful to look at them
>> individually, because there are different variations even of the
>> existing syntax conceivable. I do not understand why you elected to
>> start everything from scratch.
>>
>> Holger
>>
>>
>> On 9/03/2016 9:03, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
>>
>>> See
>>>
>>> https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/ISSUE-95:_Metamodel_simplifications#Proposal_4
>>>
>>> On 03/06/2016 06:24 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote:
>>>
>>>> Peter,
>>>>
>>>> I understand this is largely just a sketch and you may be "thinking out
>>>> loud".
>>>> Yet I don't have sufficient information on how all this is supposed to
>>>> work,
>>>> e.g. with SPARQL generation. It would help if you could provide some
>>>> examples
>>>> of how this vocabulary would be used to define some built-in and
>>>> extension
>>>> constraint types. On
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/ISSUE-95:_Metamodel_simplifications#Proposal_3
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I am presenting snippets illustrating the definitions of
>>>> ex:LanguageConstraintType, sh:PatternConstraintType and
>>>> sh:ClassConstraintType. Would you mind creating similar examples in your
>>>> metamodel?
>>>>
>>>> Furthermore, I am unclear what problem you are trying to solve. What is
>>>> broken
>>>> in the current SHACL syntax that motivates your (radical) changes? Have
>>>> any
>>>> users complained or are there any related ISSUEs recorded? Of course we
>>>> can
>>>> come up with any number of syntaxes for SHACL and I could certainly
>>>> make up
>>>> plenty of variations, too.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Holger
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 5/03/2016 13:32, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I fixed up some silly syntax errors and added prefix declarations.  The
>>>>> attached file looks OK to the syntax checker I grabbed.
>>>>>
>>>>> peter
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 03/04/2016 04:29 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Turtle file doesn't parse. Could you fix this?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Holger
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5/03/2016 10:17, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 03/03/2016 04:20 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If you want this to be
>>>>>>>> seriously considered, please work out the details, including Turtle
>>>>>>>> files
>>>>>>>> etc.
>>>>>>>> Holger
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> OK, since you asked so nicely, see the two attached files.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> peter
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>


-- 
Dimitris Kontokostas
Department of Computer Science, University of Leipzig & DBpedia Association
Projects: http://dbpedia.org, http://rdfunit.aksw.org, http://
http://aligned-project.eu
Homepage:http://aksw.org/DimitrisKontokostas
Research Group: AKSW/KILT http://aksw.org/Groups/KILT
Received on Wednesday, 9 March 2016 07:49:28 UTC

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