- From: Gary Murphy <gary@schemaapp.com>
- Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 12:12:18 -0400
- To: Håvard Ottestad <hmottestad@gmail.com>
- Cc: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>, public-shacl@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CADnyxpsLshxyvV+3obXbHV95PKogq=cOEES0B4OMOa-ZRkUpPg@mail.gmail.com>
Håvard,
If you happen to still have those instructions could you forward a copy to
me? Thanks.
Gary.
On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 10:00 AM Håvard Ottestad <hmottestad@gmail.com>
wrote:
> I ended up asking Holger, and he kindly explained how he recommends to use
> it for nested violations (eg. sh:or). So RDF4J does the same.
>
> Håvard
>
> On 26 Mar 2019, at 14:33, Gary Murphy <gary@schemaapp.com> wrote:
>
> do we have any documentation on patterns of use for sh:details?
>
> I found your post at https://github.com/TopQuadrant/shacl/issues/14 that
> outlines the effect and mentions docs could be coming, but
> https://www.w3.org/TR/shacl/#results-detail is pretty short on details
> (pardon the pun)
>
> and as much as I like the Playground for testing, I'd be using the java
> implementation for any real work.
>
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 6:51 PM Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Yes, the WG had discussed this during the design of SHACL and decided to
>> not include "nested" violations from sh:node (and similar constraint types)
>> into the top-level validation report. Instead, sh:details was introduced
>> and, for example, the TopBraid SHACL API (in Java) does support a flag to
>> activate these details. I don't think the JavaScript-based SHACL playground
>> has this option.
>>
>> Holger
>>
>>
>> On 21/03/2019 2:48 am, Gary Murphy wrote:
>>
>> using nested NodeShapes called in with sh:node gives a result that is
>> very close, but lacks clarity in the report:
>>
>> Given our old friend Bob:
>> ex:Bob
>> a schema:Person ;
>> schema:givenName "Robert" ;
>> schema:familyName "Junior" ;
>> schema:birthDate "1971-07-07x"^^xsd:string ;
>> schema:deathDate "1968-09-10"^^xsd:date ;
>>
>> and the shacl rules
>> schema:DateTimeNodeShape
>> a sh:NodeShape ;
>> sh:or (
>> [ sh:datatype xsd:dateTime ]
>> [ sh:datatype xsd:date ]
>> [
>> sh:datatype xsd:string ;
>> sh:pattern
>> "^\\d{4}-\\d{2}-\\d{2}(T\\d{2}:\\d{2}:\\d{2}[0-9+Z-]*)?$" ;
>> ]
>> ) ;
>> sh:name "dateTime" ;
>> sh:message "date must be xsd:date, xsd:dateTime or xsd:string in ISO
>> format, eg 2018-12-18T12:00:00.000+0500" ;
>> sh:severity sh:Warning ;
>> .
>>
>> schema:PersonShape
>> a sh:NodeShape ;
>> sh:targetClass schema:Person ;
>> sh:property [
>> sh:path schema:birthDate ;
>> sh:node schema:DateTimeNodeShape ;
>> sh:lessThan schema:deathDate ;
>> sh:maxCount 1 ;
>> ] ;
>> .
>>
>> A violation of sh:Warning in the DateTimeNodeShape and it's sh:message
>> are ignored, and the UI would receive the unhelpful report
>>
>> [
>> a sh:ValidationResult ;
>> sh:resultSeverity sh:Violation ;
>> sh:sourceConstraintComponent sh:NodeConstraintComponent ;
>> sh:sourceShape _:n396 ;
>> sh:focusNode <http://example.org/ns#Bob> ;
>> sh:value "1971-07-07x" ;
>> sh:resultPath schema:birthDate ;
>> sh:resultMessage "Value does not have shape schema:DateTimeNodeShape" ;
>> ] .
>>
>> ps -- thanks for spotting the +-Z slip in the regex; my datasets never
>> crossed this, but clearly +Z- is what was meant ;)
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 11:43 AM Gary Murphy <gary@schemaapp.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks -- I think NodeShape is probably what I'm needing as this allows
>>> segmenting the sh:message apart from the rest of the rules, and for
>>> UI-building purposes, avoids duplicate sh:property blocks
>>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 8:51 PM Irene Polikoff <irene@topquadrant.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> A PropertyShape must have sh:path - see
>>>> https://www.w3.org/TR/shacl/#property-shapes
>>>>
>>>> If there is no {myshape:DateShape sh:path ?something} triple, you have
>>>> an invalid shapes graph.
>>>>
>>>> You could create a node shape defining conditions on the value. Then,
>>>> use it like this:
>>>>
>>>> myshape:PersonShape a sh:NodeShape ;
>>>> sh:property [
>>>> sh:path ex:birthDate ;
>>>> sh:node myshape:DateShape;
>>>> sh:lessThan ex:deathDate ;
>>>> sh:message "Birth date must be before death date unless time
>>>> travel is possible” .}
>>>>
>>>> In this example, myshape:DateShape is a node shape. For example:
>>>>
>>>> myshape:DateShape a sh:NodeShape ;
>>>> sh:datatype xsd:string ;
>>>>
>>>> sh:pattern "^\\d{4}-\\d{2}-\\d{2}T\\d{2}:\\d{2}:\\d{2}[0-9.+-Z]*$”.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You can also use sh:or in the node shape, but your syntax is incorrect.
>>>> It would be something like
>>>>
>>>> myshape:DateShape a sh:NodeShape ;
>>>> sh:or (
>>>> [
>>>> sh:datatype xsd:dateTime;
>>>> ]
>>>> [
>>>> sh:datatype xsd:string ;
>>>>
>>>> sh:pattern "^\\d{4}-\\d{2}-\\d{2}T\\d{2}:\\d{2}:\\d{2}[0-9.+-Z]*$”;
>>>> ]
>>>> ) .
>>>>
>>>> Although, I think your sh:pattern value may have some syntax issues as
>>>> well.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mar 19, 2019, at 2:17 PM, Gary Murphy <gary@schemaapp.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Seeking some guidance with a frequent pattern: I have several
>>>> properties which are all constrained to xsd:dateTime or xsd:string with a
>>>> regex for ISO dates, but each of these properties also has other
>>>> constraints such as maxCount = 1
>>>>
>>>> So for a familiar example, in Person, for birthDate, I have these
>>>> alternatives in sh:or clauses, plus I have the maxCount and the sh:lessThan
>>>> deathDate rules, but when the data value is the wrong type, the violation
>>>> takes the sh:message for the entire test, reporting only that the
>>>> sh:OrConstraintComponent was violated and then a second violation for
>>>> sh:LessThanConstraintComponent.
>>>>
>>>> I can of course split these into successive sh:property rules for the
>>>> same sh:path and each with it's own sh:message, but the same datatype
>>>> constraints apply also to deathDate and every other date value in my
>>>> graph. I'd far prefer to define the rules for all date-like paths in one
>>>> place.
>>>>
>>>> Is it possible to define a generic "value shape" where the rules are
>>>> applied to the current path rather than to a path defined in the shape
>>>> itself?
>>>>
>>>> something like
>>>>
>>>> myshape:DateShape a sh:PropertyShape ;
>>>> [ sh:datatype xsd:dateTime ]
>>>> [ sh:datatype xsd:date ]
>>>> [ sh:datatype xsd:string ;
>>>> sh:pattern
>>>> "^\\d{4}-\\d{2}-\\d{2}T\\d{2}:\\d{2}:\\d{2}[0-9.+-Z]*$" ;
>>>> ]
>>>> ) ;
>>>> sh:name "dateTime" ;
>>>> gist:start "2017-12-18T17:00:00Z"^^xsd:dateTime ;
>>>> sh:message "Date must be xsd:date xsd:dateTime or string in ISO
>>>> format, eg 2018-12-18T12:00:00.000+0500" .
>>>>
>>>> myshape:PersonShape a sh:NodeShape ;
>>>> sh:property [
>>>> sh:path ex:birthDate ;
>>>> sh:??? myshape:DateShape ; # can this be done?
>>>> sh:lessThan ex:deathDate ;
>>>> sh:message "Birth date must be before death date unless time
>>>> travel is possible" .
>>>>
>>>> Is there any mechanism in shacl to apply a path-agnostic shape?
>>>> --
>>>> Gary Lawrence Murphy <gary@schemaapp.com> - Hunch Manifest, 15 Wyndham
>>>> N 'C', Guelph
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Gary Lawrence Murphy <gary@schemaapp.com> - Hunch Manifest, 15 Wyndham
>>> N 'C', Guelph
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Gary Lawrence Murphy <gary@schemaapp.com> - Hunch Manifest, 15 Wyndham N
>> 'C', Guelph
>>
>>
>
> --
> Gary Lawrence Murphy <gary@schemaapp.com> - Hunch Manifest, 15 Wyndham N
> 'C', Guelph
>
>
--
Gary Lawrence Murphy <gary@schemaapp.com> - Hunch Manifest, 15 Wyndham N
'C', Guelph
Received on Wednesday, 10 April 2019 16:12:54 UTC