W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-shapes@w3.org > September 2016

Re: on literals as shapes

From: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2016 09:02:19 +1000
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>, public-rdf-shapes@w3.org
Message-ID: <c1fff426-3bbb-e7df-9701-e40fae851199@topquadrant.com>
Since that "shape" would not have any constraints (as it cannot be the 
subject of any triple), nothing would happen.

Holger


On 28/09/2016 8:53, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> So this is legal SHACL then?  What happens if this shape is used in SHACL?
>
>
> Peter F. Patel-Schneider
> Nuance Communications
>
> On 09/27/2016 03:44 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote:
>> The rdfs:range of sh:shape is sh:Shape, and the "Value Type" is sh:Shape, too.
>> None of these enforce formal syntactic constraints. We could add a sh:nodeKind
>> restriction to sh:shape in the SHACL.ttl file, but haven't done so for other
>> properties either.
>>
>> Holger
>>
>>
>> On 28/09/2016 4:01, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
>>> It appears to me that
>>>
>>> [prefix declarations]
>>>
>>> s:s1 rdf:type sh:Shape ;
>>>     sh:shape 7 .
>>>
>>> is a syntactically correct shapes graph.
>>>
>>> Is this so?  If not, what makes it not be so?
>>>
>>>
>>> Peter F. Patel-Schneider
>>> Nuance Communications
>>>
>>
Received on Tuesday, 27 September 2016 23:02:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:02:44 UTC