I’m building constraints for form building, and I'm wondering the best way to
constrain a PropertyShape to say for a given property not only link to
individuals of a particular class type, but also individuals from a particular
scheme.
For example, in the following we want to use the property r
I’m wondering if anyone on the list would have advice/examples for defining
SHACL to follow best practices for embedded/nested forms. Some of the questions
I’ve come up with so far are:
* PropertyGroups and PropertyShapes can have order. Can embedded Forms take
an order position among Prop
,
Irene
On Nov 21, 2017, at 10:20 AM, Steven Michael Folsom
http://cornell.edu/>> wrote:
I’m wondering if anyone on the list would have advice/examples for defining
SHACL to follow best practices for embedded/nested forms. Some of the questions
I’ve come up with so far are:
* P
mailto:hol...@topquadrant.com>> wrote:
Yes that should work in principle. If it doesn't then we may have a bug. Have
you tried it?
Holger
On 1/12/2017 7:32, Steven Michael Folsom wrote:
One last question (hopefully) about Nested Forms.
Is nesting a form within a Nested Form as simple a
We aren’t (yet) using SHACL for validation, but we ARE using it for form
building for data that we want to comply/validate with our data goals. So maybe
the answer is, “kind of”.
A next step will be to decouple our form semantics from data validation
semantics. Shouldn’t be too hard.
Thanks,
S
I would be interested to be able to look at any implementations where
Validation shapes are compiled with non-Validation shapes to build Forms, where
that the validation axioms are maintained in separate shapes from
non-validation (UI) shapes?
Is anyone doing this? We’ve been considering it for
I realize the examples are not normative, but could the example given at
https://www.w3.org/TR/shacl/#AndConstraintComponent be stated without the blank
nodes? E.g.
ex:SuperShape
a sh:NodeShape ;
sh:property ex:SuperShapePropertyShape .
ex:SuperShapePropertyShape
I’m sure this is been asked before on the list, perhaps by me, but does anybody
know of a SHACL to HTML conversion tool? Similar to LODE, but optimized for
SHACL axioms?
Thanks,
Steven
Steven Folsom
Metadata Librarian
Cornell University
@sf433
--
You received this message because you are su
Is there a tool that writes SHACL from instance data? (Here are the shapes
based on the practices found in the instance data?)
--
Steven Folsom
Coordinator, Metadata Design and Operations
Cornell University Library
pronouns: he/him/they/them
http://orcid.org/-0003-3427-5769
@sf433
--
You re
I believe that is what https://www.w3.org/TR/shacl/#ClosedConstraintComponent
is meant to address.
From: on behalf of JD
Reply-To: "topbraid-users@googlegroups.com"
Date: Monday, October 7, 2019 at 1:33 PM
To: TopBraid Suite Users
Subject: [topbraid-users] SHACL - closed world validation
Hel
Is this a case where a SHACL NodeShape/s with a targetClass/es and
PropertyShapes would be helpful?
In some ontology development we’ve done, we decided to leave domains and ranges
open (to encourage reuse), but also defined some implementation shapes.
From: on behalf of Richard Cyganiak
Repl
I’m curious if anyone in this group has research they’d recommend looking at
that covers form design/interactions and visualization techniques that make the
shapes/domain model intuitive to the user. I’m thinking about decisions with
respect to embedded vs. separate forms for related entities, h
12 matches
Mail list logo
