- From: Solbrig, Harold R. <Solbrig.Harold@mayo.edu>
- Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 21:21:12 +0000
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>, Jose Emilio Labra Gayo <jelabra@gmail.com>, "kcoyle@kcoyle.net" <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- Cc: "public-rdf-shapes@w3.org" <public-rdf-shapes@w3.org>
Peter,
Iım puzzled why is this a pity? Iıd been under the impression that RDF,
OWL, etc. already had the interpretation area pretty well covered.
>> How can this be done with shape expressions?
<SpouseShape> { ex:Spouse @<PersonShape> }
<PersonShape> { rdf:type foaf:Person }
(not sure Iıve got the grammar 100% right Iım waiting for Eric to tell
me what I did wrong)
>> How can (aligning this with an RDF or OWL assertion that the domain of
>>ex:Spouse is foaf:Person) be done?
Donıt know.
On 7/11/14, 3:31 PM, "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
>
>On 07/11/2014 01:07 PM, Solbrig, Harold R. wrote:
>> Another way to look at this is that the domain of shape expressions is
>>RDF
>> Graph. Shape expressions have (almost) nothing to do with people,
>>spouses,
>> etc.
>
>It does appear that this is the case. Pity.
>
>> They make assertions about triples the target of anything that appears
>> as the subject of a triple with a predicate ³spouse² will be the
>>subject of
>> another triple whose predicate is rdf:type and target is foaf:person.
>
>How can this be done with shape expressions?
>
>> While it would be useful if this were compatible with an OWL or other
>> assertion about marriage being strictly being between humans (vs.
>>humans and
>> automobiles, for instance), ShEx is strictly about the graph itself
>>not its
>> interpretation. It allows an external user to know what assumptions
>>can be
>> made about the contents that every subject with rdf:type foaf:person
>>will
>> always be the subject of an rdf:name triple as well.
>
>How can this be done with shape expressions?
>
>[...]
>
>peter
>
Received on Friday, 11 July 2014 21:21:36 UTC