W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-shapes@w3.org > February 2017

Re: SHACL for OWL2

From: Simon Spero <sesuncedu@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 20:59:06 -0500
Message-ID: <CADE8KM5WcDFaJ7hqdYa2L-4gG5E6diJKaJfoyAPiQ84Hxp4ziw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
Cc: public-rdf-shapes@w3.org
On Feb 23, 2017 6:09 PM, "Holger Knublauch" <holger@topquadrant.com> ...

Regarding OWL, is there a definite list of syntax rules somewhere that
could be tested? I am also wondering whether the OWL W3C Working Group had
made such a checker mandatory for OWL implementations (as Peter requests we
make mandatory for SHACL).


Here's a pointer to the documentation on conformance testing, a link to the
test cases, the structural and FSS spec,  the OWL to RDF mapping document,
and the OWL/XML  and Manchester Syntax documents.

The structural and mapping documents are the most relevant; the former is
needed to understand the latter.

OWL 2 Web Ontology Language Conformance:

Test cases: http://owl.semanticweb.org/page/OWL_2_Test_Cases

Structural Specification  and Functional Style Syntax

OWL 2 Mapping to RDF :

Manchester Syntax: https://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-manchester-syntax/


On 24/02/2017 4:43, Stephane Fellah wrote:

I am trying to use SHACL to validate OWL 2 ontologies to enforce proper
encoding of OWL in RDF. Is there any work done in this area ? Is it
feasible ?


Stephane Fellah
Chief  Knowledge Scientist
Image Matters LLC
Office: +(703) 669 5510 <(703)%20669-5510>
Cell: 703 431 9420 <(703)%20431-9420>
Received on Friday, 24 February 2017 01:59:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:02:48 UTC