- 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