Re: Checking that SPARQL Update will not validate SHACL constraints

2023-12-14 Thread Martynas Jusevičius
Arne’s email got lost somehow but I see it in Andy’s reply. Thanks for the suggestions. On Wed, 13 Dec 2023 at 19.52, Andy Seaborne wrote: > > > On 13/12/2023 15:49, Arne Bernhardt wrote: > > Hello Martynas, > > > > I have no experience with implementing a validation layer for Fuseki. > > > >

Re: Checking that SPARQL Update will not validate SHACL constraints

2023-12-13 Thread Andy Seaborne
On 13/12/2023 15:49, Arne Bernhardt wrote: Hello Martynas, I have no experience with implementing a validation layer for Fuseki. But I might have an idea for your suggested approach: Instead of loading a copy of the graph and modifying it, you could create an

Re: Checking that SPARQL Update will not validate SHACL constraints

2023-12-13 Thread Arne Bernhardt
Hello Martynas, I have no experience with implementing a validation layer for Fuseki. But I might have an idea for your suggested approach: Instead of loading a copy of the graph and modifying it, you could create an org.apache.jena.graph.compose.Delta based on the unmodified graph. Then apply

Checking that SPARQL Update will not validate SHACL constraints

2023-12-13 Thread Martynas Jusevičius
Hi, I have an objective to only persist constraint-validated data in Fuseki. I have a proxy layer that validates all incoming GSP PUT and POST request graphs in memory and rejects the invalid ones. So far so good. What about SPARQL Update requests though? For simplicity's sake, let's say they