- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2017 13:39:36 -0800
- To: Dimitris Kontokostas <kontokostas@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>
- Cc: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>, "public-rdf-shapes@w3.org" <public-rdf-shapes@w3.org>
The current wording the document is satisfactory on this particular problem. peter On 09/25/2016 05:45 AM, Dimitris Kontokostas wrote: > Thanks for the suggestion, it is added here > <https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/commit/c3623aa6b5b4809b4eb2df3b0be32650b2dd7646>. > > On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 1:10 AM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider > <pfpschneider@gmail.com <mailto:pfpschneider@gmail.com>> wrote: > > This is getting better. > > However, it still appears possible that running a SHACL processor in an RDF > store could change the proto-shape graph or the proto-data graph. I expected > wording something like: > > SHACL processors MUST NOT change the graphs that they use to construct the > shapes graph or the data graph, even if these graphs are part of an RDF store > that allows changes to its stored graphs. SHACL processors MAY store the > graphs that they create, such as a graph containing validation results, and > this operation MAY change existing graphs in an RDF store, but not any of the > graphs that were used to construct the shapes graph or the data graph. SHACL > processing is thus idempotent. > > > peter > > > > On 09/24/2016 06:53 AM, Dimitris Kontokostas wrote: > > Hi Peter and thank you for your feedback > > > > I tried to work further on this here > > > <https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/commit/339b655f82463161b954684ea205b3c67fb483e8 > <https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/commit/339b655f82463161b954684ea205b3c67fb483e8>>, > > let me know if this resolves the issue. > > > > Thanks, > > Dimitris > > > > On Friday, September 23, 2016, Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com > <mailto:holger@topquadrant.com> > > <mailto:holger@topquadrant.com <mailto:holger@topquadrant.com>>> wrote: > > > > On 23/09/2016 11:36, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > > > > > > union operations on data graphs and shapes graphs > > > > It is unclear just what the data graph and the shapes graph are. > > There is > > > > wording that both of these cannot be changed. However, there is also > > wording > > that various kinds of union operations are to be performed on > shapes and > > data graphs. > > > > Comment (HK): The only place I could find "union" was about > > handling > > > > of owl:imports, which states that the result of this union is > used as > > shapes > > graph. This looks OK to me. Could you clarify what you mean? > > > > Comment (DK): I tried to make the wording clearer here: > > > > > https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/commit/b6fd2db5719cc9c9bdec464acdd2aefc8d0b5b68 > <https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/commit/b6fd2db5719cc9c9bdec464acdd2aefc8d0b5b68> > > > <https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/commit/b6fd2db5719cc9c9bdec464acdd2aefc8d0b5b68 > <https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/commit/b6fd2db5719cc9c9bdec464acdd2aefc8d0b5b68>> > > > > I don't find this much better. If the shapes graph and the data > graph > > cannot be changed then there should not be wording about unioning, > > extending, or otherwise modifying the shapes graph or the data > graph. > > > > > > Dimitris, do you have time to revise this further? I guess we need > to find > > a different term than "shapes graph" for the originally supplied graph. > > The real shapes graph may be the one that is the output of the > transitive > > closure process. > > > > Thanks > > Holger > > > > > > > -- > 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 Tuesday, 7 February 2017 23:12:08 UTC