In case the purpose of modelling is really 'data validation' would it be better 
to go for SHACL-only (ie CWA-only) or still combine SHACL with RDFS?
(like in http://spinrdf.org/shacl-and-owl.html). Would there be a downside of a 
SHACL-only approach. Like always having to specify properties in the context of 
a shape?

In case of validation AND data sharing would it still work or would it be 
better to use 'RDFS + SHACL' where the SHACL is separately used at say 2 
validation sides (importing the RDFS) and RDFS-only for the sharing spec?
But then introducing some potential OWA/inference in the middle (that doesn't 
HAVE to be utilized). Or is all THAT inference harmless wrt OWA/CWA discussion 
(ie inferencing rdfs superclass instantiation).

Thx for your views here, Michel





Dr. ir. H.M. (Michel) Böhms
Senior Data Scientist


T +31888663107
M +31630381220
E [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

Location<https://www.google.com/maps/place/TNO+-+Locatie+Delft+-+Stieltjesweg/@52.000788,4.3745183,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x47c5b58c52869997:0x56681566be3b8c88!8m2!3d52.000788!4d4.376707>



[cid:[email protected]]<http://www.tno.nl/>

This message may contain information that is not intended for you. If you are 
not the addressee or if this message was sent to you by mistake, you are 
requested to inform the sender and delete the message. TNO accepts no liability 
for the content of this e-mail, for the manner in which you use it and for 
damage of any kind resulting from the risks inherent to the electronic 
transmission of messages.









-- 
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.

Reply via email to