- From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2016 09:32:21 -0700
- To: public-rdf-shapes@w3.org
Peter, I have begun an informal list of issues being brought up so that we may go through them as a group. (It's easy to lose track in this complexity of email threads.) The page is: https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/Comments/September2016/ and I can see that it already goes beyond September, but I will try to keep it up to date as we go on, regardless of its title. I wouldn't say that it is complete today - I'm still digging through emails. kc On 10/1/16 8:08 AM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > This works for me, but does the working group agree with this change to SHACL? > > Peter F. Patel-Schneider > Nuance Communications > > On 09/26/2016 04:32 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote: >> >> >> On 27/09/2016 1:50, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: >>> On 09/26/2016 12:12 AM, Holger Knublauch wrote: >>>> >>>> On 26/09/2016 16:31, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: >>>>> "the property sh:entailment can be used to instruct a SHACL Full processor >>>>> to ensure that a given entailment is activated on the data graph." >>>>> >>>>> Can SHACL Core processors "activate" entailment? >>>> I have removed the term "Full" from this section. >>>> >>>> https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/commit/ebeb18f61eea4bf3164ee183ca166a70a2f5cfce >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Indeed there could be implementations of less than SHACL Full that still >>>> provide entailment support. However, the sh:entailment property lies outside >>>> of SHACL, and this is clarified by the position of this paragraph in the Part >>>> II of the spec. >>> That works. >>> >>>>> "In addition to shape definitions, the shapes graph may contain additional >>>>> information for the SHACL processor such as entailment directives." >>>>> >>>>> "If an entailment regime is provided in the data graph which is not >>>>> supported by the SHACL Full processor, the validation must produce a >>>>> failure." >>>>> >>>>> Where can the entailment directive/regime be? >>>> I assume you mean what the subject of sh:entailment is? We have left this >>>> undefined, i.e. it can be attached to any subject. A typical design pattern >>>> would be to place it into an owl:Ontology node but since the shapes graph may >>>> contain any number of them (owl:imported) we didn't want to open yet another >>>> topic that may lead to controversial discussions >>> The first quote above says that the entailment directive/regime is in the >>> shapes graph. The second quote says that if an unsupported entailment >>> directive/regime is in the data graph then something is wrong. This doesn't >>> make sense. >> >> Yes, this was a bug in the spec. The sh:entailment triples must be in the >> shapes graph. Clarified: >> >> https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/commit/f7998dbaccf10e00333f05f87cb744c20f19d4a1 >> >> >> Thanks >> Holger >> >> > > -- Karen Coyle kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
Received on Saturday, 1 October 2016 16:32:52 UTC