 |
 |
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