Re: HTTP requests, databases and how to transmit SHACL validation reports

Hi Andy, Holger and everyone else here.

With RDF4J we are moving along with the following:
 - Status code: 409 Conflict
 - Header: Content-Type: application/shacl-validation-report+n-quads

We will support all current formats in the same way as they are supported
today:

application/shacl-validation-report+ld+json for JSON-LD
text/shacl-validation-report+turtle for Turtle

This means that the existing support for content types can be leveraged to
support this new one by essentially doing a search replace for
"shacl-validation-report+" => "" and then use the existing content-type
parsers. I agree that text/turtle seems odd, but it's simpler to implement
this way instead of doing something special just for the SHACL report.

It's great to have this community where we can bring up these questions and
aim for a consensus across implementations.

Cheers,
Håvard

On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 12:25 AM Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
wrote:

>
> On 23/03/2020 02:23, Håvard Ottestad wrote:
> > And: Did the SHACL Working Group discuss this issue? Maybe in light of
> the SPARQL protocol?
>
> The original W3C WG did not have time to conclude such a discussion, and
> it would be a prime candidate for a future revision or separate note.
> There were many topics that we ran out of time on.
>
> Holger
>
>
>
>