Re: multiple matching shapes and sh:closed

On 5/06/2020 03:08, Vladimir Alexiev wrote:
> If you look at 
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-shacl/2020Jun/0005.html, 
> we plan to use more complex targeting than targetClass, eg
> ex:PoliticianReferenceShape a sh:NodeShape;
>    sh:property [sh:path rdf:type; sh:in (foaf:Person dbo:Person)];
>    sh:property [sh:path dc:type; sh:hasValue "politician"];
> But that's not the point. The point is that if I distribute the props 
> in some meaningful way
> (eg name, birthDate in shape Person and party, politics in shape 
> Politician),
> I cannot close either of them because I need to close the union of them.
>
> Maybe I can use sh:and, and then sh:closed will look at all props 
> occurring in the different branches of the sh:and and traversing down 
> to sh:path?
>
> ex:PoliticianShape a sh:NodeShape;
>   sh:target ex:PoliticianReferenceShape;
>   sh:and (
>     ex:PersonShape
>     [sh:property [sh:path ex:politics; sh:in ("Democrat" "Republican")]]
>     [sh:property [sh:path ex:party; sh:node ex:PartyReferenceShape]]
>   );
>   sh:closed true
> .

No, sh:and cannot be used, because sh:closed will only look at direct 
sh:property triples on the same level in the same shape.

(And besides, sh:and doesn't add meaning anyway and only ever 
contributed to confusion I think. Maybe it's a candidate for deprecation 
in the future alongside targets at property shapes, but I digress).

I see no solution for your scenario at the moment except using 
SHACL-SPARQL to define your own constraint component. We did something 
similar in 
http://datashapes.org/constraints.html#ClosedByTypesConstraintComponent 
because the core sh:closed didn't cover our usual use cases.

Holger