My understanding is that the semantics of the following shape is that every
individual related to a ex:Work through ex:subject must be a member of ALL
of the classes listed. Am I wrong to think this?
sh:property [
sh:path ex:subject ;
sh:target ex:Work ;
sh:class ex:Instance ;
sh:class ex:Item ;
sh:class ex:Temporal ;
sh:class ex:Work ;
sh:class ex:Event ;
sh:class ex:Language ;
sh:class ex:Concept ;
sh:class ex:Location ;
sh:class ex:Agent ;
] .
Based on the examples I've seen, using sh:in seems to be reserved for
listing individuals. Am I wrong to think this? For example is it permitted
to construct the following shape using sh:in for classes?
sh:property [
sh:path ex:subject ;
sh:target ex:Work ;
sh:in ( ex:Work ex:Instance ex:Item ex:Temporal ex:Event ex:Language
ex:Concept ex:Location ex:Agent ) ;
] .
My use cases are to be able to say in a dataset only these types of things
can be the subject of a work AND to build a form that narrows the types of
things that can be the subject of a ex:Work.
Any help to understand how to say these types of constraints using SHACL
would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Steven
------------
Steven Folsom
Metadata Specialist
Cornell University Library
http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3427-5769
http://vivo.cornell.edu/individual/sf433
@sf433
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"TopBraid Suite Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
