Re: Shapes Repository

út 31. 3. 2026 v 12:06 odesílatel Jesse Wright <jesse.wright@theodi.org>
napsal:

> Dear Solid Community,
>
> We would like to share a new repository - https://github.com/solid/shapes -
> aimed at supporting interoperability in the Solid ecosystem.
>
> We’d really welcome your feedback on this and the role it could play for
> the community!
>
> Primarily, this repository is designed to:
>
>    1.
>
>    Provide a space for the community to converge on the data models used
>    across applications – declared using SHACL shapes
>    2.
>
>    Build up a collection of well-understood, reusable shape patterns
>    3.
>
>    Enable a collaborative review process where shapes can be compared and
>    discussed transparently
>    4.
>
>    Support artefact generation from shapes, including object abstractions
>    in Javascript <https://github.com/rdfjs/wrapper>, data validators
>    (using SHACL engines), and forms
>    <https://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/shacl12-ui/>.
>    5.
>
>    Offer visibility into existing shapes to encourage reuse, reduce
>    duplication, contributor recognition, and help new participants get started
>    more easily
>
> We have documented an initial contribution process in the repository. In
> addition, there is an important human consensus step
> <https://github.com/solid/shapes/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md> that we are
> still refining and would welcome feedback on
> <https://github.com/solid/shapes/issues/24>.
>
> We have pre-filled this repository with shapes that we know are already
> used within the ecosystem – including shapes based on the data models used
> by SolidOS. We would now like to invite you to contribute shapes,
> representing the data that your Solid applications read and write - please
> refer to the guidelines on contributing
> <https://github.com/solid/shapes/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md>.
>
> Note: The goal of this repository is to achieve interoperability through
> social consensus rather than technical complexity, such as inference or
> mappings. As the Solid ecosystem scales beyond its current size, we may
> eventually deprecate this repository in favor of other mechanisms. We also
> expect that this repository will, in time, evolve beyond the use of SHACL
> alone – ways we imagine this could happen include:
>
>    -
>
>    Ontology-Driven Approach <https://github.com/solid/shapes/issues/32>:
>    Moving toward a set of recommended ontologies based on actual usage. Shapes
>    would still document how applications read/write data, with automated
>    checks to ensure they conform to these recommended ontologies.
>    -
>
>    Consistency Checks <https://github.com/solid/shapes/issues/33>:
>    Ensuring the consistency of recommended ontologies (though this may be too
>    academic for practical implementation).
>    -
>
>    Foundational Ontology <https://github.com/solid/shapes/issues/34>:
>    Introducing a foundational ontology (e.g., UFO) that all other ontologies
>    build upon (similarly, this may be too academic for our current needs).
>
> These are subject to change based on feedback from the repository’s usage
> and other interoperability efforts.
>
> If you have comments, we’d like to gather initial feedback asynchronously
> via GitHub discussions <https://github.com/solid/shapes/discussions>. If
> there’s interest in a deeper discussion, we can schedule a call or bring
> this to the Community Group agenda.
>
> Design decisions have been itemised on GitHub
> <https://github.com/solid/shapes/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20label%3Adesign> and
> we would encourage you to comment on individual design decisions there
> rather than via the email thread.
>
> Looking forward to your thoughts!
>

Hi Jesse,

Thanks for the effort on this, very much appreciated. The human consensus
approach feels like a meaningful step forward.

One challenge in this area has been sustaining momentum over time, as
similar efforts have tended to stall. It would be great to see how this can
remain active and broadly adopted across implementations.

It might also be worth looking at prior work such as
https://pdsinterop.org/conventions/addressbook/ which covers some of the
same ground.

Best,
Melvin


> Best,
> --
> *Jesse Wright (he/him)*
>
> *Project Lead, Solid
> <https://theodi.org/news-and-events/news/odi-and-solid-come-together-to-give-individuals-greater-control-over-personal-data/>*
> The Open Data Institute
> 4th Floor, Kings Place, 90 York Way, London, N1 9AG
> Website: theodi.org
> Book a meeting: https://calendar.app.google/hv63aFQyL6jgjiXG9
> Tel: +44 7862381515
> *My work day may look different than yours. Please do not feel obligated
> to respond outside of your normal working hours.*
>