Re: pySHACL Question

Hello Nicholas,

Thank you for your reply. I filed an issue with the pySHACL project and
received a response explaining the issue, how to resolve it, and what the
best practice is.

The issue can be found at https://github.com/RDFLib/pySHACL/issues/46 and
contains the correct gist URL (
https://gist.github.com/James-Hudson3010/2588d9b17dd33e15922122b8b5cf1bd7 )

The key concept I was missing, which you mention as well, was that the
shape file needs to contain all of the ontology information as well. When I
split the files, the shape.ttl file did not contain any of the required
ontology information. This matches the behavior of
https://shacl.org/playground/ as well.

Regards,
James


On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 6:49 AM Nicholas Car <
nicholas.car@surroundaustralia.com> wrote:

> Hi James,
>
> Something funny about that Gist: it doesn’t resolve!
>
> Sorry but without that, I can’t retry your first command quoted below to
> try and replicate your output.
>
>
> is it a best practice to always put everything into a single file?
>
>
> Quite the opposite: my day-to-day use of pySHACL involves separate shape,
> ontology and data files. The SHACL playground [1] also expects the shape
> files to be separate from the data files.
>
>
> I will say that your SHACL shape results (which I can’t see the source
> files for since the gist is gone) should really have error messages in them
> so you can get some human-readable send of what’s through be a violation.
>
> What do you see int eh data files where the errors are triggered in the
> all-in-one validation? Even whiteout human-redable error messages, you
> should be able to manually inspect the focus nodes (d:e4, d:e3 & d:e2) and
> see if you can determine whether they are should be failing. For example,
> it looks like d:e2 is missing 1+ hr:jobGrade.
>
>
> One final thing, a point of order: for this sort of question, you might be
> better off in StackOverflow tagged [shacl] [2] as it’s a use question (of a
> SHACL tool), rather than a SHACL dev question per se.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Nick
>
>
>
> [1] https://shacl.org/playground/
> [2] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/shacl
>
>
>
> On 30 Mar 2020, at 9:59 pm, James Hudson <jameshudson3010@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> If this is not the appropriate forum for this question, please let me know.
>
> I have a gist with all of the relevant files at:
> https://gist.github.com/James-Hudson3010/65be952d586859da380d949e7b520320
>
> If I execute:
>
> $ pyshacl -a -f human employees.ttl
>
>
> I get the following, correct validation report...
>
> Validation Report
> Conforms: False
> Results (3):
> Constraint Violation in MaxInclusiveConstraintComponent (
> http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl#MaxInclusiveConstraintComponent):
> Severity: sh:Violation
> Source Shape: hr:jobGradeShape
> Focus Node: d:e4
> Value Node: Literal("8", datatype=xsd:integer)
> Result Path: hr:jobGrade
> Constraint Violation in DatatypeConstraintComponent (
> http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl#DatatypeConstraintComponent):
> Severity: sh:Violation
> Source Shape: hr:jobGradeShape
> Focus Node: d:e3
> Value Node: Literal("3.14", datatype=xsd:decimal)
> Result Path: hr:jobGrade
> Constraint Violation in MinCountConstraintComponent (
> http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl#MinCountConstraintComponent):
> Severity: sh:Violation
> Source Shape: hr:jobGradeShape
> Focus Node: d:e2
> Result Path: hr:jobGrade
>
>
> However, if I split employees.ttl into three files containing the schema,
> shape, and instance data and run:
>
> pyshacl -s shape.ttl -e schema.ttl -a -f human instance.ttl
>
>
> the result is:
>
> Validation Report
> Conforms: True
>
>
> I assume I am calling pyshacl correctly.
>
> If there are other tools similar to pySHACL that allow me to split the
> shape, schema, and instance files, I would be interested in learning about
> them. Or, is it a best practice to always put everything into a single file?
>
> Regards,
> James
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________________________
>
> Dr Nicholas Car
> Data Systems Architect
> SURROUND Australia Pty Ltd
> Address P.O. Box 86, Mawson, Canberra ACT 2607
> Phone  +61 477 560 177
> <+61+414+99+55+43?utm_source=WiseStamp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=signature>
> Email  *nicholas.car@surroundaustralia.com
> <nicholas.car@surroundaustralia.com>*
> Website  *https://surroundaustralia.com <https://surroundaustralia.com>*
>
>
> *Enhancing Intelligence Within Organisations**delivering evidence that
> connects decisions to outcomes*
>
>
>
>
>
>