- From: Tomasz Pluskiewicz via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 25 May 2020 11:42:16 +0000
- To: public-hydra-logs@w3.org
Class and Shape are orthogonal. A shape can, via `sh:targetClass` refer to an `rdfs:Class` it describes but there is no 1:1 relation. You will likely have multiple shapes which define a single graph. Slightly different semantics. With `supportedClass` it says "those are the Classes the consumer is likely to find in an API". > I was also thinking on how the client would tell a server on it's preferences regarding data structure description If we agree to add `Shape` to range of `expects` I would have a 100% compliant client understand both. In the long run could even see `hydra:Class` deprecated as it unnecessarily overlaps the features of SHACL. I think it's a waste of time to use it where SHACL can be used. Would only need small extensions to SHACL where it is not enough (`hydra:required`?) -- GitHub Notification of comment by tpluscode Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/HydraCG/Specifications/issues/214#issuecomment-633530987 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 25 May 2020 11:42:18 UTC