Re: graph containing comprehensive set of ill-formed shapes

But, of course, SHACL Core and SHACL-SPARQL implementations will produce different results. This is by design. 

SHACL Core processors do not support SHACL-SPARQL. By definition, a SHACL Core and a SHACL SPARQL processors are only interoperable for a subset of SHACL which is SHACL Core and sh:sparql is not in SHACL Core.

> On Apr 21, 2017, at 2:43 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> A SHACL implementation that silently ignores sh:sparql constructs produces an
> interoperability nightmare.
> 
> For example, such an implementation will produce no violations for the shape
>  ex:sparql a sh:NodeShape ;
>    sh:targetNode ex:i ;
>    sh:sparql "SELECT ?this WHERE { }" .
> A SHACL-SPARQL implementation will instead produce a violation.
> 
> peter
> 
> 
> On 04/21/2017 03:39 AM, Irene Polikoff wrote:
>> Peter,
>> 
>> If your implementation is SHACL Core only, how could SHACL-SPARQL constructs affect it? It would seem to me that the values in the sh:spraql triples would be no different to it than values in the ex:foo (or any user defined predicate) triples.
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>>> On Apr 21, 2017, at 12:45 AM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> My alt-SHACL implementation does complete syntax checking, signalling whenever
>>> in encounters a shape or path or list that is not correctly formed.  My
>>> implementation has a strict mode that signals whenever the putative shapes
>>> graph contains anything that violates any of the SHACL Core syntax rules or
>>> contains a recursive shape or contains SHACL-SPARQL constructs that could
>>> affect validation.  To test this checking I had put together an RDF graph
>>> containing a comprehensive set of constructs that need to be checked.
>>> 
>>> I just updated this graph, and the associated checking code, to incorporate
>>> the numerous additional syntax rules that were added when the SHACL document
>>> became a candidate recommendation.   I include the graph here.  It can be
>>> turned into a comprehensive set of syntax test cases for SHACL Core by just
>>> separating it into small graphs each containing one of the test shapes.
>>> 
>>> The amount of code required to do complete syntax checking was quite modest.
>>> Running my implementation over the graph was helpful in finding bugs such as
>>> incorrect recursion checks in the path code.  I strongly recommend that every
>>> SHACL implementation be run on every shape in this graph.
>>> 
>>> Peter F. Patel-Schneider
>>> Nuance Communications
>>> <syntax.ttl>

Received on Friday, 21 April 2017 19:02:31 UTC