- From: Vladimir Alexiev via GitHub <noreply@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2026 15:41:01 +0000
- To: public-shacl@w3.org
VladimirAlexiev has just created a new issue for https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes: == sh:prefixes vs rdfs:isDefinedBy == - https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/issues/857 makes the case that many NodeShapes and PropertyShapes may want to use `sh:prefixes` not just SPARQL NodeShapes - In all SHACL examples `sh:prefixes` points to an ontology (and that's the right place, rather than hanging `sh:declare` off of random nodes) - A long-established best practices is that every ontology term needs to have `rdfs:isDefinedBy` pointing to the ontology - Implicit targeting (and the new `sh:ClassShape`) creates classes and shapes at one go, so using `rdfs:isDefinedBy` is fully warranted: ```ttl :MyClass a rdfs:Class, sh:NodeShape; rdfs:isDefinedBy :MyOntology. :YourClass a sh:ClassShape; rdfs:isDefinedBy :MyOntology. ``` - @nicholascar was looking for a way to tie up shapes to ontologies, as part of modularization/profiles So we have 2 props that relate a Shape to an Ontology: - `rdfs:isDefinedBy` has stronger semantics as it says "the Shape is part of the Ontology" - `sh:prefixes` has weaker semantics as it says "the Shape uses prefixes attached to the Ontology" I guess the request I'm making is this: - if a NodeShape or PropertyShape has `rdfs:isDefinedBy` then also infer a parallel `sh:prefixes` link - we cannot just say `rdfs:isDefinedBy rdfs:subProperyOf sh:prefixes` because that's not true of non-SHACL ontology terms - a NodeShape or PropertyShape is not allowed to have different `rdfs:isDefinedBy` and `sh:prefixes` Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/issues/858 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Wednesday, 15 April 2026 15:41:02 UTC