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

Re: shapes-ISSUE-181: SHACL conformance for partial validation reports [SHACL Spec]

From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 17:06:09 -0700
To: public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <48cfecf3-543c-296e-42dc-bb1e73533994@kcoyle.net>

On 9/29/16 3:54 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote:
> Hi Jose
> others may correct me, but my understanding is that all conformant SHACL
> validation engines need to produce all the "mandatory" fields of the
> results format.

which are sh:focusNode and sh:severity - which is a bit awkward since 
the focus node (isn't that "target node" now?) doesn't tell you what 
constraints were evaluated.

  They may decide to return less, but that should only be
> an option.
> Our test cases should also include the full info, because engines that
> only produce true or false can still use these test cases, while the
> inverse is not the case.

Since severity is mandatory, how will T/F work?


> Holger
> On 29/09/2016 19:59, RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
>> shapes-ISSUE-181: SHACL conformance for partial validation reports
>> [SHACL Spec]
>> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/181
>> Raised by: Jose Emilio Labra Gayo
>> On product: SHACL Spec
>> When preparing the test-suite, it is not clear to me if we have to
>> declare/check all the validation reports that must be returned by a
>> SHACL processor or just a true/false.
>> The spec contains the following phrase:
>> "The validation process returns a validation report containing all
>> validation results. For simpler validation scenarios, SHACL processors
>> SHOULD provide an additional validation interface that returns only
>> true for valid or false for invalid."
>> A SHACL processor that wants to handle use case 3.31
>> (https://www.w3.org/TR/shacl-ucr/#uc34-large-scale-dataset-validation)
>> about validating very large datasets may decide to return just the
>> first violation it finds, instead of continue processing/generating
>> all the possible violations.
>> Is that SHACL processor conformant with the spec? In that case, when
>> defining the test-suite, is it enough if we just declare true/false as
>> the possible result of SHACL validation? Or if a SHACL processor
>> returns just the first violation report that it finds?
>> In any case, I think the spec should be more clear about when a SHACL
>> processor is conformant or not if it doesn't return all the violation
>> reports and just returns the first one or signals that there was an
>> error.

Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
Received on Friday, 30 September 2016 00:06:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:30:36 UTC