On 7/24/14, 7:36 PM, Dimitris Kontokostas wrote: Another related use case is that if a constraint violation happens, the system could *suggest* a fix. In SPIN we do this by creating INSERT/DELETE template calls as part of a constructed spin:ConstraintViolation. This can be exposed by user interfaces via a button "Fix me". I think this should be out of the scope of the validation language but the language should support such hooks with generic annotations [1] that other tools can interpret [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-shapes/2014Jul/0208.html > Yeah, suggesting fixes is really a nice-to-have, and this feature has not been used much so far in our experience. Fortunately we are in RDF where anybody can add extra triples to an existing object, e.g. add >"annotations" to a constructed spin:ConstraintViolation object. That's one reason why we went with constraint definitions based on CONSTRUCT. Hi all, I recorded the discussed requirements in the RDF validation requirements database: http://purl.org/net/rdf-validation http://lelystad.informatik.uni-mannheim.de/rdf-validation/?q=R-155-GUIDANCE-HOW-TO-BECOME-VALID-DATA http://lelystad.informatik.uni-mannheim.de/rdf-validation/?q=R-189-ADD-ANNOTATIONS-TO-CONSTRAINT-VIOLATION-OBJECTS http://lelystad.informatik.uni-mannheim.de/rdf-validation/?q=R-135-CONSTRAINT-LEVELS Please feel free to add your thoughts to the database. Best, Thomas >Holger
Received on Friday, 25 July 2014 15:28:26 UTC