- From: makxdekkers via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2018 12:27:21 +0000
- To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
I agree with @dr-shorthair that DCAT will lose relevance if we are too strict. On the other hand, some of the machinery that we're using does care about strict rules; for example, using SHACL you can only validate that the object of a particular statement is an instance of a certain, expliclty defined class: the `skos:Concept` http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/marcgt/man fails the test for rdfs:Class. A human observer may not object to it but SHACL definitely does. I've seen a work-around in SHACL to just test whether there is a URI, and not look further into it. So, you could stick any URI into the statement and SHACL would not be able to catch it. In a way, using `rangeIncludes` instead of `rdfs:range` makes the problem go away, but it would make the validation of objects with SHACL less clear (maybe impossible?). -- GitHub Notification of comment by makxdekkers Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/314#issuecomment-416934177 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 29 August 2018 12:27:22 UTC