W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-shapes@w3.org > August 2014

Re: Wondering about an example of closed world validation

From: Arthur Ryman <ryman@ca.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2014 15:27:11 -0400
To: "public-rdf-shapes@w3.org" <public-rdf-shapes@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OFFD94D846.35357D37-ON85257D27.0069F501-85257D27.006ADD0A@ca.ibm.com>
fyi, Shapes is like SPARQL in that it applies to a set of triples. The set 
of triples may include triples added by a reasoner. There is no explicit 
interaction between Shapes and a reasoner.

Regards, 
___________________________________________________________________________
Arthur Ryman, PhD

Chief Data Officer, Rational
Chief Architect, Portfolio & Strategy Management
Distinguished Engineer | Master Inventor | Academy of Technology

Toronto Lab | +1-905-413-3077 (office) | +1-416-939-5063 (mobile)





From:   "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
To:     Jose Emilio Labra Gayo <jelabra@gmail.com>, 
Cc:     Dimitris Kontokostas <kontokostas@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>, 
Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>, "public-rdf-shapes@w3.org" 
<public-rdf-shapes@w3.org>
Date:   08/01/2014 01:54 PM
Subject:        Re: Wondering about an example of closed world validation



ShEx and Resource Shapes work on an RDF graph.  This does not mean that 
they 
can be used in combination with a reasoner, even an RDF reasoner.  SPARQL 
has 
entailment regimes, which specifies how SPARQL is supposed to work with 
reasoning.

Consider, for example, that there are infinitely many RDF consequences of 
a 
finite RDF graph.  How do I run ShEx and Resource Shapes on an infinite 
graph?

Consider, for example, that the OWL consequences of a finite RDF graph are 

generally not representable as an RDF graph.  How do I combine ShEx or 
Resource Shapes with OWL?

peter

PS:  The fixes to make ShEx and Resource Shapes to work with RDF and RDFS 
reasoning may not be all that hard, but I don't see any place that they 
have 
been stated.


On 07/31/2014 10:32 PM, Jose Emilio Labra Gayo wrote:
>
>     Sure there are lots of ways of proceeding.  You may believe that
>     without-reasoning is better.  I may believe that with-reasoning is 
better.
>     However, ShEx and Resource Shapes appear to only allow 
without-reasoning,
>     which I think is completely broken.
>
>
> That is not true, ShEx and Resource Shapes work independently of 
reasoning. As
> I said in another thread, they can be used in combination with a 
reasoner.
>
> It is similar to SPARQL, you would not say that SPARQL only allows
> without-reasoning, it is just independent of reasoning, which means that 
you
> can do SPARQL with or without a reasoner.
>
> In fact, the lightweight nature of ShEx means that it can be used before 
and
> after reasoning: before reasoning to check if you have the triples that 
you
> expect and after, to check if the reasoner added the triples that you 
wanted.
>
> Best regards, Jose Labra
Received on Friday, 1 August 2014 19:27:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:02:40 UTC