Re: shapes-ISSUE-130 (rdf dataset assumption): SHACL should not assume that the data graph is in an RDF dataset [SHACL Spec]

On 18/03/2016 18:38, Dimitris Kontokostas wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 9:41 AM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider 
> <pfpschneider@gmail.com <mailto:pfpschneider@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     If it is always possible to construct the dataset, then I don't
>     see a problem
>     either.  However, is this always possible?  For example, a user
>     who is just
>     trying to validate a graph may not have permissions to create or
>     modify a dataset.
>
>
> iirc there was a resolution on supporting only in-memory validation 
> (not my favorite and cannot find it), e.g. full shacl may not run on 
> remote  datasets e.g. sparql endpoints.
> With this in mind an implementation could just copy the shapes & data 
> graph in memory and perform the validation there

The resolution that we made a while ago was to not require support for 
the SPARQL endpoint protocol. Note that this is different from the 
question of in-memory vs database. It means that implementations can 
still work against databases, e.g. via an API such as ARQ or Sesame (for 
which all major databases provide drivers for), while the SPARQL 
endpoint protocol is too limiting for what SHACL needs to do.

Holger