- From: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
- Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 11:31:17 +1000
- To: "public-rdf-sha." <public-rdf-shapes@w3.org>
Hi Peter, thanks for the updates. I had to make a further correction to one of your files, which did not parse as valid Turtle. Meanwhile I have re-run my tests and updated the results, showing two failures: 1) On the shared property shape test - we had discussed this topic before - and my interpretation remains that the report should contain the result twice. I have added a corresponding test case for that variation. Moving forward I see the following options: a) The spec is clear - that only one have to be produced (in which case variation 2 is removed) - that two results have to be produced (in which case variation 1 is removed) b) The spec leaves the interpretation open (in which case we should not have a test case at all) c) The spec has an error and we need to make adjustments I have no strong opinion either way and don't believe this scenario will happen often in practice. 2) The pre-binding question is probably beyond what most people here understand so I have contacted Andy for his input. I will put both topics on the agenda for the upcoming WG meeting. Holger On 17/04/2017 23:36, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > On 04/16/2017 05:55 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote: >> Hi Peter, >> >> thanks for submitting 3 new test cases [1]. I made a couple of syntactic >> corrections which you can track on github. Among the more critical changes were: >> >> - the sh:value of the values.ttl test is ex:i, not 5, because the query does >> not return ?value and in that case the engine reverts to using the value node >> (which is the focus node in this case), see [2] > Yes, I forgot to set value. Thanks for the fix, and the fix to > sh:sourceConstraint. > > I added another test where both $this and ?value are set from one VALUES > construct. > >> - I have deactivated the bind.ttl test case [3] because it is unclear what it >> is supposed to demonstrate. My current Jena-based engine returns no violation >> there, while your test seems to expect one violation. Could you explain the >> motivation for the test and the reason for your expected result? > This is a complex example. > > The empty BGP at the start of the query is removed because of the > simplification step 18.2.2.8 so $this is not bound at the beginning of the > query. The SELECT * WHERE { } does not bind $this because $this is not > in-scope in it, even though $this has a value from the empty BGP in it. > Because $this does not have a value the BIND leaves ?that unbound. Because > ?that is unbound, the BGP matches against the triple ex:j a ex:bad in the > data graph. As there is a solution there is a violation of the shape. > > I modified the test to use ?value instead of ?that and to return ?value to > better utilize the behaviour of pre-binding. > >> - I have deactivated the shared.ttl test case [4] because it does not reflect >> the SHACL spec. The given validation result expects that the sh:node >> constraint is producing a violation with sh:ClassConstraintComponent as >> sourceConstraintComponent. However, the validation of sh:node (as explained in >> [5]) produces results with sh:NodeConstraintComponent as results. In other >> words, the results only report on conformance of the sh:node, and do not >> "walk" into it. Please feel free to submit an update to that test. > Yes, I was incorrectly thinking that sh:node constraints also reported their > component violations, not just an overall violation. I have modified the > test to demonstrate the shared violation. > >> Regards, >> Holger >> >> >> [1] >> > https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/pull/50/files/f857d2014900854ea1a0cf2ad498c9d0ae03cc0b..de60116e88470f51320e2442cce8698d7a44c6c8 >> [2] https://www.w3.org/TR/shacl/#sparql-constraints-variables >> [3] >> > https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/tree/gh-pages/data-shapes-test-suite/tests/sparql/pre-binding >> [4] >> > https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/tree/gh-pages/data-shapes-test-suite/tests/core/validation-reports >> [5] https://www.w3.org/TR/shacl/#NodeConstraintComponent >> > > peter
Received on Tuesday, 18 April 2017 01:31:53 UTC