Re: Extent of SHACL?

Hi Danny,

If you want to get a feeling for SHACL's ability to throw a net over a
graph, you could play around with the sample graph and sample shapes
on the SHACL
playground <http://shacl.org/playground/>.

Next to data validation, in my experience SHACL is also good for describing
how a dataset is structured, which can be a good starting point for
generating documentation and diagrams. SHACL is a better fit for closed
world models, while OWL better fits the open world assumption. But I don't
think that SHACL should be cast as an alternative to OWL, although there is
some overlap between the specifications.

Regards,
Frans


2018-08-15 5:43 GMT+02:00 Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>:

> Once again I'm a little late to the party (but still determined to sup).
> Got a bit disturbed by Kurt's post [1].
>
> I'm trying to find the point, it's not clear to me. What am I missing?
>
> I like the idea of a validation language, the Jena folks did a great lint+
> which was very useful. But is this/that really a constraint language?
>
> Missing an obvious one maybe, the locally closed world, applying
> PROLOG-style rules.
>
> I like the idea of throwing a net over a graph, finding the little fishies
> that slip out. But does this one actually catch anything?
>
> Cheers,
> Danny.
>
> [1] https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/meet-shacl-next-owl-kurt-cagle/
>
>
> --
> ----
>
> http://hyperdata.it <http://hyperdata.it/danja>
>