Re: divergence in the definition of sh:minCount

Even if you "count all nodes, even duplicates", there is still a violation in

Data:
  :john :child :bill .
  :john :son :bill .
  :john :child :mary .
  :john :daughter :mary .

Shape
  s:s1 rdf:type sh:Shape ;
    sh:targetNode :john ;
    sh:property [ sh:path [ sh:alternativePath ( :child :son :daughter ) ] ;
                  sh:minCount 3 ] .

If something other than "A validation result must be produced if the number of
value nodes is less than the value of sh:minCount." is desired then this
wording can no longer be used, particularly given the wording about path-based
property constraints at the beginning of Section 4.

peter



On 09/24/2016 07:12 AM, Dimitris Kontokostas wrote:
> Hi Peter,
> 
> is this about the fact that property paths might return duplicate value nodes
> or something else?
> In this case, we count all nodes, even duplicates for cardinality restrictions
> 
> Thanks,
> Dimitris
> 
> On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 9:17 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider
> <pfpschneider@gmail.com <mailto:pfpschneider@gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>     The textual and SPARQL definitions of sh:minCount do not align when paths
>     are allowed.
> 
> 
>     A validation result must be produced if the number of value nodes is less
>     than the value of sh:minCount.
> 
>     SELECT $this
>     WHERE {OPTIONAL {$this $PATH ?value .}}
>     GROUP BY $this
>     HAVING (COUNT(?value) < $minCount)
> 
> 
> 
>     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
>

Received on Saturday, 24 September 2016 21:43:55 UTC