Hi Karen,

I started to reading it, and I find it quite helpful.

I have a suggestion: for me the formal definitions (such as "Shape :=
label:IRI|BNode, targets:Set[Target], filters:Set[Shape],
constraints:Set[Constraint]") would be more readable if they would be
in monospace characterset - similarly than the examples.

"This signifies that a Shape has four components called label,
targets, filters, constraints. The label is either a IRI or BNode, the
targets are a set of Targets, the filters are a set of Shapes, and the
constraintsis a set of Constraints."
Here I would expect a bit more explanations something like "targets
are a set of Targets (the elements which are selected as the subject
of validation)".

I am not sure whether the result in the example for 5.1.3 Datatype
section is right. I would expect issue2 is right because it is a
xsd:dateTime, and issue1 is wrong because it is a xsd:date, and not
the other way around.

Do you know any existing implementation or is there a project working
on the implementation?

Best regards,
Péter


2016-09-05 17:21 GMT+02:00 Karen Coyle <[log in to unmask]>:
> Folks,
>
> There is a W3C standard (SHACL)[1] in development that would address the
> issue of validation of RDF graphs. The standard itself is, as standards tend
> to be, long and not an easy read. Eric Prud'hommeaux and I (both committee
> members) have created a first draft of a brief reference document, in the
> form of an Abstract Syntax of the core vocabulary of the SHACL standard. We
> welcome any comments or corrections to this document, and any suggestions
> for making it better. The draft is at:
>
> https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/WD-shacl-abstract-syntax-20160825/
>
> Comments should be sent to the mail list at:
>
> [log in to unmask]
>
> However, I will also entertain any discussion that takes place here, which
> feels less formal than posting to a W3C list. Our goal is to make SHACL Core
> as clear as possible for first time users. If this becomes a W3C standard,
> it will probably eventually become available in various RDF-related tools.
>
> Thanks,
> kc
> [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/shacl/
>
>
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> Subject: FIRST PUBLIC WORKING DRAFT: SHACL CORE ABSTRACT SYNTAX AND
> SEMANTICS
> Resent-Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 16:46:10 +0000
> Resent-From: [log in to unmask]
> Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 09:45:36 -0700
> From: Karen Coyle <[log in to unmask]>
> Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
> To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
>
> **Please forward to interested lists**
>
> As announced on the W3C blog[1], the first public working draft of the SHACL
> Core Abstract Syntax[2] has been published by the RDF Data Shapes Web
> Working Group.[3]
>
> "This document defines an abstract syntax for the core SHACL (SHApes
> Constraint Language). It is derived from the SHACL specification and is a
> non-normative version of the content of that specification."
>
> We are soliciting comments (and questions) on this first draft. Please
> comment at [log in to unmask]
>
> ---------
> [1] https://www.w3.org/blog/news/archives/5749
> [2] https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/WD-shacl-abstract-syntax-20160825/
> [3] https:////www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/
>
>
> --
> Karen Coyle
> [log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
> m: +1-510-435-8234
> skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600



-- 
Péter Király
software developer
GWDG, Göttingen - Europeana - eXtensible Catalog - The Code4Lib Journal
http://linkedin.com/in/peterkiraly