W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-esw-thes@w3.org > January 2016

Re: S36 implementation details

From: Osma Suominen <osma.suominen@helsinki.fi>
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 10:46:41 +0200
To: public-esw-thes@w3.org
Message-ID: <569F4971.8090807@helsinki.fi>
Hi Antoine!

I just noticed this item in the TopBraid 5.1.0 release notes [1]:

- Feature: Added SHACL library for SKOS constraints.

So apparently SHACL rules for SKOS constraints have already been 
developed (by TopQuadrant I assume). Which is maybe not a big surprise, 
since they've had SPIN rules for SKOS for quite some time and SHACL is 
in some ways a successor of SPIN (with TopQuadrant represented in the 
SHACL WG) and SKOS ICs were also one of the initial use cases for SHACL [2].


[1] http://www.topquadrant.com/docs/versions/changes-5.1.txt

[2] https://www.w3.org/TR/shacl-ucr/#uc21-skos-constraints

18.01.2016, 09:32, Antoine Isaac kirjoitti:
> Thanks a lot, Osma!
> This is really good to have.
> And in a way confirms the interest of wait-and-seeing until we can start
> playing with SHACL / RDF Shapes (arguably closer to SPIN).
> To come back to Simon's comment. Yes OWL2 is good, but having an OWL1
> representation already allows to use SKOS in OWL2 context (i.e. it
> specifies which classes and properties are in the SKOS vocabulary). What
> we're missing then is a handful of contraints from the SKOS model, which
> OWL2 may anyway not allow one to capture in the way most people would
> need them (i.e. in a 'closed-world' manner).
> Best,
> Antoine
> On 1/18/16 8:18 AM, Osma Suominen wrote:
>> On 17/01/16 12:29, Antoine Isaac wrote:
>>> I'm actually a bit surprised I couldn't find a trace of an earlier
>>> attempt...
>> Are you perhaps referring to Paul Hermans' series of blog posts from
>> 2010 where he attempted to express some of the SKOS ICs using OWL2 and
>> SPIN? His conclusion at the time was that most of them couldn't be
>> represented in OWL2.
>> The blog is long gone now but the posts are still available thanks to
>> the Internet Archive:
>> https://web.archive.org/web/20130522054521/http://www.proxml.be/users/paul/weblog/aaad2/Integrity_constraints_in_SKOS_part_1_.html
>> https://web.archive.org/web/20130522051358/http://www.proxml.be/users/paul/weblog/55d41/Integrity_constraints_in_SKOS_part_2.html
>> https://web.archive.org/web/20130522044951/http://www.proxml.be/users/paul/weblog/bfa21/Integrity_Constraints_in_SKOS_part_3.html
>> https://web.archive.org/web/20130522033512/http://www.proxml.be/users/paul/weblog/0a621/SKOS_part_4_property_chains.html
>> There is also some commentary on the topic on Holger Knublauch's blog
>> (obviously promoting SPIN):
>> http://composing-the-semantic-web.blogspot.com/2010/04/where-owl-fails.html
>> -Osma

Osma Suominen
D.Sc. (Tech), Information Systems Specialist
National Library of Finland
P.O. Box 26 (Kaikukatu 4)
Tel. +358 50 3199529
Received on Wednesday, 20 January 2016 08:47:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:46:48 UTC