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

Re: Simplification of scopes section (see also ISSUE-148)

From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
Date: Fri, 13 May 2016 19:00:42 -0700
To: public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <573686CA.3060804@kcoyle.net>


On 5/13/16 5:23 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote:
> On 14/05/2016 0:29, Karen Coyle wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 5/12/16 8:37 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote:
>>>
>>> Does anyone have use cases for "all subjects" and "all objects" scopes?
>>
>> I'll have to dig through the email archive, but I recall that both
>> Arthur and I made a case for a "general" scope that included the
>> entire data graph without further refinement. That may be the origin
>> of this. (I don't see it in the UCR.)
>>
>> If your data graph is simple and flat, further scoping beyond "the
>> data graph" may not be possible. I don't, however, have an example in
>> hand, although I can imagine such scenarios. I will poke around some
>> more. The validation rules in that case would look like:
>>
>> In the data graph, every dct:subject must have an IRI for an object;
>> every dct:title must have a literal for an object.
>
> Both of these examples seem to be property scopes, not all-object
> scopes,

Yes, and the examples that Arthur and I talked about were mostly 
property scopes. I don't recall any that were object or subject scopes. 
Then again, that was  a while ago so if anyone else remembers this, 
please weigh in.

kc

e.g. it could be
>
> ex:MyShape
>      a sh:Shape ;
>      rdfs:comment "every dct:subject must have IRIs as objects" ;
>      sh:scopeProperty dct:subject ;
>      sh:property [
>          sh:predicate dct:subject ;
>          sh:nodeKind sh:IRI ;
>      ] .
>



> I have added a proposal to delete AllObject/AllSubjectScopes to
>
> https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/Proposals#ISSUE-148:_Scope_declaration_simplification
>
>
> Thanks,
> Holger
>
>>
>> I don't think this is going to be a common case, but since Arthur also
>> brought it up, maybe Jim has something to say based on OSLC experience?
>>
>> kc
>>
>
>
>

-- 
Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
Received on Saturday, 14 May 2016 02:01:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:30:33 UTC