- From: Víctor Rodríguez Doncel <vrodriguez@fi.upm.es>
- Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2015 12:08:23 +0200
- To: Simon Steyskal <simon.steyskal@wu.ac.at>
- CC: Serena Villata <serena.villata@inria.fr>, Sabrina Kirrane <sabrinakirrane@gmail.com>, "ODRL Community Group (Contrib)" <public-odrl-contrib@w3.org>
Thanks! I will take a look... I assume we are meeting then next week, isnt it? If this is the case, maybe we can progress on this. After your edition and my last changes, I am not aware of many more changes to be done... Víctor El 04/06/2015 11:56, Simon Steyskal escribió: >> I wonder how can we specify this beyond an English sentence. > > haha yes, we may have to hack some fancy semantics together for that ;) > >> But... which should be the reference software to validate the >> expressions? > > unfortunately there doesn't exist any (official) validator for SHACL > yet, but most of the constraints are expressible in SPARQL anyway. > Holger Knublauch gave it a first shot in [1], but he is currently > focussing on implementing a SHACL API for TopQuadrant's TopBraidComposer. > > cheers, simon > > > [1] https://github.com/HolgerKnublauch/shacl-lite > > > --- > DDipl.-Ing. Simon Steyskal > Institute for Information Business, WU Vienna > > www: http://www.steyskal.info/ twitter: @simonsteys > > Am 2015-06-04 11:45, schrieb Víctor Rodríguez Doncel: >> Yes, hence my concern about "having conflicts for the conflict >> resolution" >> odrl:conflict may declare prohibitions take precedence in general, but >> one specific permission may gain precedence if so declared with the >> odrl-ld:precedenceOver. >> I wonder how can we specify this beyond an English sentence. >> >> Also, I think the RDF Shapes spec is truly clear. But... which should >> be the reference software to validate the expressions? >> I have peeked here http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/wiki/ShEx, but I am >> unsure about it... >> Where should I look at? >> >> Víctor >> >> >> El 04/06/2015 11:28, Simon Steyskal escribió: >>> 4) Well to some extend.. While odrl:conflict only allows to state >>> that in case of conflicting rules either the permission or >>> prohibition takes precedence, odrl-ld:precedenceOver would allow to >>> specify that specific rules (if they are applicable too) can take >>> precedence over others regardless their respective type. -- Víctor Rodríguez-Doncel D3205 - Ontology Engineering Group (OEG) Departamento de Inteligencia Artificial Facultad de Informática Universidad Politécnica de Madrid Campus de Montegancedo s/n Boadilla del Monte-28660 Madrid, Spain Tel. (+34) 91336 3672 Skype: vroddon3
Received on Thursday, 4 June 2015 10:08:56 UTC