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

Re: question about ShEx values

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2014 06:09:23 -0700
Message-ID: <53CA6E03.4030204@gmail.com>
To: Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>
CC: Jose Emilio Labra Gayo <jelabra@gmail.com>, "public-rdf-shapes@w3.org" <public-rdf-shapes@w3.org>


On 07/18/2014 09:50 AM, Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote:
> * Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com> [2014-07-18 05:49-0700]
>> That seems truly bizarre.
>>
>> Does anyone know whether this is a desired behaviour?
>
> It was certainly intentional that one be able to specify or verify compliance with value sets. I understand that this a bit of an anathema to OWL but it's the sort of functionality we need to provide if we want RDF to be taken seriously in most industries. For example, a substantial fraction of medical informatics concearns with specification and enforcement of value sets.
>
>
>> peter

It is certainly not anathema to OWL to specify value sets.  One can easily 
construct OWL restrictions for value sets, like
   all ex:property { ex:val1 ex:val2 }
A constraint interpretation of this construct would be that every value given 
for ex:property has to be either ex:val1 or ex:val2.  One can also require the 
existence of a value.

peter
Received on Saturday, 19 July 2014 13:09:53 UTC

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