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

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

From: Dimitris Kontokostas <kontokostas@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>
Date: Thu, 19 May 2016 17:37:45 +0300
Message-ID: <CA+u4+a1uaJnkUCTC0TdQ_3F8L-9ZUa2b9BZv0oAj4D6P7rpavA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
Cc: public-data-shapes-wg <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
IIRC, This is the proposal we voted for
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-data-shapes-wg/2015Dec/0044.html

and there were some followup questions e.g. the following that was tagged
by mistake under a different issue
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-data-shapes-wg/2016Jan/0015.html
here it is clarified that scoping and filters are ignored when the shapes
are referenced from another shape



On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 4:59 PM, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote:

> Thanks. Can you describe or point me to the resolution? - kc
>
> On 5/18/16 10:59 PM, Dimitris Kontokostas wrote:
>
>> Karen,
>>
>> This is an issue I raised sometime ago and we have a resolution with the
>> current design
>> https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/49
>>
>>
>> On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 3:26 AM, Holger Knublauch
>> <holger@topquadrant.com <mailto:holger@topquadrant.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     Not all shapes need to have a scope IMHO. It's the same situation as
>>     in ontology development. Not every class that is published in an
>>     ontology is used by everyone, and thus does not need to have
>>     instances. Sometimes shapes will be defined in one file so that they
>>     can be extended with a scope in another file, for one specific
>>     application.
>>
>>     I don't see a problem with our current design, and sh:scopeProperty
>>     being sometimes a bit redundant. As I said elsewhere, there are
>>     cases where sh:scopeProperty and sh:predicate are in fact different.
>>     I would not favor introducing a new concept for nested shapes.
>>
>>     Holger
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     On 19/05/2016 2:22, Karen Coyle wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>         On 5/15/16 10:37 AM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
>>
>>             If all shapes are to have scopes then there are ways around
>>             this problem.  One
>>
>>                     would be that shapes are not embedded in other
>>                     shapes.  Instead there would be
>>                     a new kind of SHACL thing that is used when the
>>                     current effect of embedding
>>                     shapes in shapes is desired.
>>
>>
>>         +1. I can't think of a good name for these, but it seems to me
>>         that we have:
>>
>>         SHACL "file" (data set, whatever) - a set of shapes and
>> constraints
>>         shape - defines a scope, optional filters, and related constraints
>>         constraint - the node that defines a set constraints that will
>>         be applied to the focus node
>>         [X] - a set of constraints
>>
>>         [X] can be a blank node, as it is in many shapes, or it may have
>>         an IRI, which is what was formerly illustrated in Example 1.
>>         (This assumes that the only difference between them is
>> IRI-v-bNode.)
>>
>>         The "embedded" vs. "referenced" doesn't make sense in an RDF
>>         context, to my mind. It has instead to do with whether the
>>         constraints are local-only (bnode) or shareable (IRI).
>>
>>         kc
>>         p.s. This doesn't take into account Holger's latest proposal to
>>         place shapes sub constraints, but I don't think that makes a
>>         difference here
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Dimitris Kontokostas
>> Department of Computer Science, University of Leipzig & DBpedia
>> Association
>> Projects: http://dbpedia.org, http://rdfunit.aksw.org,
>> http://aligned-project.eu
>> Homepage: http://aksw.org/DimitrisKontokostas
>> Research Group: AKSW/KILT http://aksw.org/Groups/KILT
>>
>>
> --
> Karen Coyle
> kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
> m: 1-510-435-8234
> skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
>
>


-- 
Dimitris Kontokostas
Department of Computer Science, University of Leipzig & DBpedia Association
Projects: http://dbpedia.org, http://rdfunit.aksw.org,
http://aligned-project.eu
Homepage: http://aksw.org/DimitrisKontokostas
Research Group: AKSW/KILT http://aksw.org/Groups/KILT
Received on Thursday, 19 May 2016 14:38:41 UTC

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