Re: Inferencing

I would be very disappointed if the RDF graph

foo rdf:type bar .
bar rdfs:subClassOf bbb .

satisfied the constraint

bbb <= atleast 2 prop

I thus think that inferencing has a lot to do with constraint checking.


peter


On 08/08/2014 05:33 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote:
>
> On 8/8/14, 10:24 AM, Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote:
>>
>> > 3. OPTIONAL A specification of how shape verification interacts with
>> > inference.
>>
>> I think this one feel off radar. Did you see any support for this?
>>
>
> In general, constraint checking should not *require* inferencing. However, I
> believe we should make sure that the topic of inferencing does not get
> prohibited by the charter. If the WG decides there is a chance to improve the
> semantic web stack, then it should be allowed to do so. For example I do like
> the idea in one of the ShEx papers to use structural information to produce
> new output (e.g. XML trees or other RDF triples). Another example is
> spin:rule, which is in our experience tremendously useful for defining
> mappings between ontologies, and to calculate the ex:area of a ex:Rectangle
> from ex:width and ex:height. Once we have a mechanism to attach SPARQL and
> templates to classes for constraint checking, we could use exactly the same
> mechanism to define such production rules - it becomes a rather trivial
> addition that would keep the solution consistent. All this could go into a
> separate, non-normative deliverable, but we should not exclude it.
>
> Holger
>
>

Received on Saturday, 9 August 2014 00:40:24 UTC