Re: on determinism in SPARQL constraints

Thanks Peter,

This is a good point but a possible constraint would be "an issue should
not be issued with a future date"

given the following data graph:
 ex:issue1 ex:issued "10-10-2016"^^xsd:date

if we run the validation now we would get different results compared to
running a validation with the exact same input after 10 days.

How could we define a validation scenario to be deterministic but at the
same time allowing such cases?
Requiring identical shapes and data graph would obviously not be enough and
we need to somehow introduce time, but not sure how.

Best,
Dimitris

On Sat, Oct 1, 2016 at 3:25 AM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider <
pfpschneider@gmail.com> wrote:

> What happens if a SPARQL query in SHACL is non-deterministic?  Is there any
> guarantee about when and how often SPARQL queries are processed to produce
> a
> query result?
>
> For example are there any guarantees that
>
> **prefixes, etc., as needed**
>
> s:s1 rdf:type sh:Shape ;
>  sh:targetClass ex:c1 ;
>  sh:property [ sh:predicate ex:p1 ;
>                sh:qualifiedMinCount 1 ; sh:qualifiedMaxCount 1 ;
>                sh:qualifiedValueShape [
>                  sh:property [ sh:predicate ex:p2 ;
>                                sh:shape s:s2 ] ] ] .
>
> s:s2 rdf:type sh:Shape ;
>  sh:sparql [ sh:prefixes ex: ;
>   sh:select """SELECT $this WHERE {
>              BIND ( ( RAND() * 25 )  AS ?r )
>              FILTER ( STRLEN($this) < ?r ) }""" ] .
>
> will never produce a violation on the data graph
>
> PREFIX rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#>
> PREFIX ex: <http://ex.org/>
>
> ex:i1 rdf:type ex:c1 ;
>  ex:p1 [ ex:p2 ex:i3 ], [ ex:p2 ex:i3 ] .
>
>
> Peter F. Patel-Schneider
> Nuance Communications
>
>


-- 
Dimitris Kontokostas
Department of Computer Science, University of Leipzig & DBpedia Association
Projects: http://dbpedia.org, http://rdfunit.aksw.org,
http://aligned-project.eu
Homepage: http://aksw.org/DimitrisKontokostas
Research Group: AKSW/KILT http://aksw.org/Groups/KILT