- From: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
- Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 09:09:19 +1000
- To: public-hydra@w3.org
On 12/15/2014 5:44, Markus Lanthaler wrote: > At the moment we can't really. We need to find a solution for this or, > if we are lucky, someone else will for us. The new RDF Data Shapes WG > works on exactly this. Unfortunately I'm not up to date with their > work but Holger (CC'ed) is quite active in that group and may have a > couple of minutes to give us a status update. The Shapes group is still in its early stages - we are about to finish (or freeze) the User Stories which are input to the Requirements which we have started collecting. It is hard to say how long that phase will take; I certainly hope this can be covered in January and we have the first technical proposals shortly after that. But who knows... The topic of nested (or context-sensitive) property definitions has come up in the group as well, and it will almost certainly be covered by the resulting standard. For example, the Resource Shapes 2.0 language, which is one of the inputs to the WG, has a system property :valueShape [1] that is linking a :Property with additional constraints for its values. This is similar to owl:allValuesFrom in that it allows you to use nested (blank) nodes that go various hops deep from the starting point. So although I cannot speak on behalf of the WG, I believe this topic will be covered by the new shapes language, and we will hopefully come up with something that can be plugged directly into Hydra and similar frameworks. On the more general topic of properties being global or scoped to classes, I believe the schema.org people followed the concepts explored by RDF Schema (with variations of global range and domain definitions), yet I do not believe there are strong reasons for defining property semantics this way. I believe it would be more helpful to align the schema.org model with traditional object-oriented modeling, where a property would be attached to a class. This resolves some of the problems with overlapping domains/ranges. For example what would happen if a property has two rangeIncludes and two domainIncludes - which combinations are really valid? If you scope a property declaration to the context of a class, this issue is solved much clearer. HTH Holger [1] http://www.w3.org/Submission/2014/SUBM-shapes-20140211/#valueShape
Received on Sunday, 14 December 2014 23:12:22 UTC