joint JSONLD-Ontology-SHACL validation

A discussion "Sharing some real-world use of JSON-LD" turned towards
discussion of errors in JSON-LD contexts.
Here are two examples:

   - Collapsing of Class vs Property in Context: eg this in UNTP (DPPs etc)
   "partyAlsoKnownAs": {"@id": "untp-core:Party"...}
   This perhaps comes from the inability of JSONLD to infer a @type
   (rdfs:range reasoning)
   - Publishing an ontology instead of context (by EKGF DPROD of all
   people!):
   https://github.com/EKGF/dprod/issues/93

Then Alastair Parker of jargon.sh wrote:
> One thing I do think would materially help the JSON-LD ecosystem more
broadly is better automation around detecting these kinds of issues. As a
tool vendor, we’ve put a lot of effort into producing correct and compliant
JSON-LD, but there is no widely adopted, machine-executable suite of design
or compliance rules that check for many of the modelling, consistency, and
stylistic concerns you’ve raised.
By contrast, in the OpenAPI world, communities rely heavily on rule-based
linting (for example using Spectral) to express outcome-focused design
rules that can run in CI/CD pipelines. I’ve experimented with applying a
similar approach to JSON-LD and currently use a small internal rule set
within Jargon’s generation pipeline, but those rules are necessarily
incomplete and largely derived from observed UNTP patterns rather than
community-wide consensus.

I think this is a very important question to ease and increase the adoption
of JSONLD and ultimately semantic technologies.
I think the only way to do this is by cross-checking of the Context against
Ontology definition and/or SHACL.
So it strongly relates to 2 things:

   - Polyglot modeling https://github.com/json-ld/yaml-ld/issues/19,
   because the best way to produce coordinated Context+Ontology is to produce
   them from a unified model.
   LinkML is perhaps the leading framework, Jargon is another great
   example, and OO-LD is one of the few that can attach target @type
   - DX PROF because it offers a way to package coordinated tech artefacts:
   context, ontology and shapes (and examples, and JSON schema etc etc)
   - Perhaps SHACL Profiling

Nick, should I post this as a SHACL Profiling usecase?
I know I've been letting the SHACL WG down for lack of time... :-(

-- 

Vladimir Alexiev, PhD, PMP
Chief Data Architect
Ontotext, doing business as Graphwise


Websites www. <https://www.semantic-web.com/>graphwise.ai, www.ontotext.com
, www.semantic-web.com

Publications/CV <https://rawgit2.com/VladimirAlexiev/my/master/index.html>,
LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/valexiev>, GitHub
<https://github.com/VladimirAlexiev/>, Scholar
<https://scholar.google.bg/citations?user=r4TvZdYAAAAJ&hl=en>, Calendar
<https://www.google.com/calendar/embed?src=vladimir.alexiev@ontotext.com>, +359
888 568 132 <359888568132>