Re: Shapes - sub-classes / sub-properties

>
>
>>>> 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
>
>
Reading your message, I think that I may have misunderstood your first
question in this thread. Were you asking about sub-shapes or how we could
extend one shape from another?

In that case, there is already a proposal on that by Eric Prud'hommeaux and
his Javascript implementation already supports it. In the case of Shexcala,
I still didn't implement it, but I am planning to do it in the future.

Best regards, Jose Labra