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

Re: using Shape Expressions to validate RDF graphs

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 12:56:26 -0700
Message-ID: <53C0416A.9020601@gmail.com>
To: Jose Emilio Labra Gayo <jelabra@gmail.com>, kcoyle@kcoyle.net
CC: "public-rdf-shapes@w3.org" <public-rdf-shapes@w3.org>
I'm still trying to figure out how shape expressions can constrain the shape 
of RDF graphs.  Yes, they can constrain the shape of a RDF graph flowing out 
of a single source, but that's only part of the problem.  Another part, and 
one that I think is much more important, is constraining the "shape" of nodes 
that belong to a particular class.

So, again, how can I describe those RDF graphs where every node that has an 
rdf:type link to :GraduateStudent has at least one :university triple and the 
object of such triples have an rdf:type link to :ResearchUniversity?

peter


On 07/11/2014 12:39 PM, Jose Emilio Labra Gayo wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 7:02 PM, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net
> <mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net>> wrote:
>
>
>
>     On 7/11/14, 9:31 AM, Jose Emilio Labra Gayo wrote:
>
>         I mean, OWL and Shape Expressions have different goals...with OWL you
>         model an ontology of concepts, while with Shape Expressions you just
>         describe the shapes of RDF graphs.
>
>
>     Jose, do you see them as complementary, perhaps working together? In other
>     words, is a solution needed that checks both OWL(-type) inferences AND the
>     shapes of the graphs? (I'm trying to get at the overall scope of the need.)
>
>
> Yes, definitely.
>
> In my point of view, OWL is very good at semantic level while Shape
> Expressions are more suited for the syntactic level or data integration level.
>
> Peter's example: "the spouse of every person is a person" seems for me more at
> the semantic or domain model level...and I would probably model it in OWL.
>
> In practice, if you have information like:
>
> :john :spouse :mary .
>
> and the previous declaration in OWL, the system could infer that :mary is a
> Person and if there were some declarations saying that mary is not a person,
> the system would detect an inconsistency.
>
> Apart from that, if you have a data portal about people, you may be interested
> to say that a resource has the shape of a Person and has some properties, like
> ":spouse", "foaf:name", etc. In this case, you are describing the RDF graph
> that you are publishing or that someone can consume from your data portal...
>
> I think the motivations for declaring the Shape Expressions of a data portal
> are very pragmatic and I have found that they cover a need for RDF data
> publication, consumption and integration...but of course, they are
> complementary with having OWL ontologies.
>
> Best regards, Jose Labra
>
>
>
>     kc
>
>     --
>     Karen Coyle
>     kcoyle@kcoyle.net <mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net> http://kcoyle.net
>     m: 1-510-435-8234 <tel:1-510-435-8234>
>     skype: kcoylenet
>
>
>
>
> --
> Saludos, Labra
Received on Friday, 11 July 2014 19:56:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:02:39 UTC