- From: Robert David <9427084@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2024 10:05:16 +0100
- To: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
- Cc: Vladimir Alexiev <vladimir.alexiev@ontotext.com>, Public Shacl W3C <public-shacl@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAPJObv7RPid7nR_st94fbbv+TVGfXTy69rFy406zpKGxF+wLrg@mail.gmail.com>
Hi everyone, thanks for the info. Having a report on positive results is really helpful in practice. Btw. are there any plans to update the W3C recommendation eventually? Best regards, Robert Am Do., 18. Jan. 2024 um 18:44 Uhr schrieb Holger Knublauch < holger@topquadrant.com>: > > > On 18 Jan 2024, at 4:29 pm, Vladimir Alexiev < > vladimir.alexiev@ontotext.com> wrote: > > sh:closed is *local*, i.e. per shape. It checks that a *targeted *node > doesn't include *unsanctioned props*. > I'm looking for ways to declare a *globally *closed schema, i.e. to catch *untargeted > *nodes, i.e. that the KG doesn't include *unsanctioned nodes*. > > 1. I guess one can do it with SPARQL (SHACL advanced) by triggering off > some fixed node. > Here's a very expensive way to catch all nodes: select distinct ?s {?s > ?p ?o} > 2. It would be useful to "mark" all nodes visited during SHACL validation.. > - SHEX has a way to report positive results: > https://shexspec.github.io/primer/ShExJ#validation > - SHACL doesn't have a standard way to report positive results: > https://www.w3.org/TR/shacl/#results-validation-result . > But there is a note "SHACL implementations may use other SHACL > subclasses of sh:AbstractResult, for example, to report successfully > completed constraint checks or accumulated results." > Say we "standardize" a new class eg dash:PositiveValidation > > > Already exist: > > dash:SuccessResult > a rdfs:Class ; > rdfs:comment "A result representing a successfully validated constraint.." ; > rdfs:label "Success result" ; > rdfs:subClassOf sh:AbstractResult ; > . > > > Then one could look for nodes that don't appear in > sh:ValidationResult.focusNode nor dash:PositiveValidation.focusNode > > > Yes. > > There may also be different algorithms such as enumerating the allowed > rdf:types which could be represented with a targeted constraint on rdf:type > and a sh:in. This depends on what someone considers unsanctioned nodes. > > Holger > > > > All feedback is welcome! > > >
Received on Friday, 19 January 2024 09:08:39 UTC