- From: Dimitris Kontokostas <kontokostas@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>
- Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2014 12:10:41 +0300
- To: Jose Emilio Labra Gayo <jelabra@gmail.com>
- Cc: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>, Simon Spero <sesuncedu@gmail.com>, "public-rdf-sha." <public-rdf-shapes@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CA+u4+a23zN2igR3UFp_-a=YBZoH2FcS6uJxDn=mE-Q0guUEGLQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 8:27 AM, Jose Emilio Labra Gayo <jelabra@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 7:05 AM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider < > pfpschneider@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 07/16/2014 09:39 PM, Jose Emilio Labra Gayo wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 5:48 AM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider >>> <pfpschneider@gmail.com <mailto:pfpschneider@gmail.com>> wrote: >>> >>> [...] >>> >> >> I think you are right and Shape checking is more low level than >>> constraint >>> checking in general. However, I also think there are plenty of practical >>> applications where one would like to have some way to declare the shapes >>> of >>> RDF graphs in a easy and automatically verifiable way. >>> >> >> Now we may be getting somewhere. >> >> What are these practical applications that you think require shape >> checking? >> > > I think I already mentioned them in the previous email. They could be > summarized as publish and develop RDF based applications, and consume and > integrate data between different linked data portals. > > For example, I have found Shape Expressions are very helpful to specify > the contents of the RDF graphs that I want to publish, so I can tell my > team of developers that they have to produce graphs with those > shapes...also, I have found that data portals documented with Shape > Expressions can help consumers to know which are the shapes of the RDF > graphs behind them. > I don't see any drawback in term of readability for data consumers (there might be some typos) e.g. <Agent> {a foaf:Agent, foaf:mbox xsd:string} <Person> {a foaf:Person, foaf:surname rdf:langString, foaf:firstName rdf:langString} compared to <Agent> {a foaf:Agent, foaf:mbox xsd:string} <Person> & <Agent> {a foaf:Person, foaf:surname rdf:langString, foaf:firstName rdf:langString} There can also be a special notation when we want to match subClasses e.g. [foaf:Agent] or anything else that might fit in the relaxng syntax > > My canonical application for constraint checking is that I am writing a >> program to consume RDF graphs, and I want to know that some information is >> explicitly present in that RDF graph. For example, I want to know that >> each graduate student has a university explicitly given and that that >> university is a research university. > > > I think I have already done some shape expressions for that example or a > similar one in another thread...it can be done with shape expressions as > long as you are interested in the shape of the RDF graphs that you > retrieve... > > Best regards, Jose Labra > >> >> >> Best regards, Jose Labra >>> >> >> peter >> >> > > > -- > Saludos, Labra > -- Dimitris Kontokostas Department of Computer Science, University of Leipzig Research Group: http://aksw.org Homepage:http://aksw.org/DimitrisKontokostas
Received on Thursday, 17 July 2014 09:11:37 UTC