shapes-ISSUE-224 (Improved shape type definitions): Can we improve the language around the use of rdf:types for shapes [SHACL - Core]

shapes-ISSUE-224 (Improved shape type definitions): Can we improve the language around the use of rdf:types for shapes [SHACL - Core]

http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/224

Raised by: Holger Knublauch
On product: SHACL - Core

See https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-shapes/2017Feb/0001.html the explanation of how to use rdf:types of shapes could be improved.

Suggested changes:

Remove:
- Its subclasses sh:NodeShape and sh:PropertyShape can be used to represent node and property shapes, respectively.
- sh:NodeShape is the class of node shapes and should be declared as a type for shapes that are IRIs. However, the presence of any rdf:type triple does not determine whether a node is treated as a node shape or not. 
- sh:PropertyShape is the class of property shapes and should be declared as a type for shapes that are IRIs. However, the presence of any rdf:type triple does not determine whether a node is treated as a property shape or not.

Add:
- It is recommended, but not required, for a property shape to be declared as a SHACL instance of sh:PropertyShape.
- It is recommended, but not required, for a node shape to be declared as a SHACL instance of sh:NodeShape.

Received on Sunday, 5 February 2017 06:20:03 UTC