Re: shapes-ISSUE-210 (Expected type): value types and expected types [SHACL Spec]

This ticket is no longer needed because I had deleted the "value type" 
column from all of the constraint component definitions. Instead, it now 
says, for example,

The values of|sh:minCount|must be literals with datatype|xsd:integer|.

This makes the example that Peter mentions below an invalid shape.

Holger


On 21/11/2016 7:01, RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
> shapes-ISSUE-210 (Expected type): value types and expected types [SHACL Spec]
>
> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/210
>
> Raised by: Karen Coyle
> On product: SHACL Spec
>
> Peter's email: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-shapes/2016Oct/0040.html
>
> "The value type, i.e., expected type, of sh:minCount is xsd:integer.  The
> definition of expected type is:
>
> "Expected Type
> In a shapes graph, the values of a property or a property path can have an
> expected type. These nodes are treated as instances of specific classes,
> even when these nodes are not SHACL instances of these classes. For example,
> the objects of triples with sh:shape as predicate have sh:Shape as expected
> type and there does not need to be a triple with the object node as the
> subject, rdf:type as predicate and sh:Shape as object in the shapes graph."
>
> This means any node can be the object of sh:minCount in a constraint so that
>
> s:s1 rdf:type sh:Shape ;
>   sh:property [ sh:predicate ex:child ;
>                 sh:minCount ex:John ] .
>
> is a valid shape.
>
> All constraint parameters with a value type that is a datatype have similar
> issues."
>
>
>