Holger, Thanks for your advice here. I've tried out what you suggested, but I'm having trouble getting the desired results. I'm sure that I am doing something wrong.
To get more specific about my use case: I want to say that each instance of ex:Code can be the object of ex:exact_code for at most one instance of ex:HwcvConcept, but there should be no restrictions on the number of objects that ex:exact_code may have for any given instance of ex:HwcvConcept. Both ex:Code and ex:HwcvConcept are already NodeShapes, and a property shape called ex:HwcvConcept-exact_code has already been defined as well. To which of these shapes would I need to add the constraints you suggest -- or would they need to be added to an entirely new shape? I could also add sh:severity and a sh:message to this shape, right? thanks, Carl On Saturday, January 25, 2020 at 3:44:03 PM UTC-8, Holger Knublauch wrote: > > Hi Carl, > > here is a design pattern for this: > > ex:UniqueValueShape > a sh:PropertyShape ; > sh:targetObjectsOf ex:property ; > sh:path [ sh:inversePath ex:property ] ; > sh:maxCount 1 . > > The above applies to all values of ex:property, i.e. the distinct objects > of triples that have ex:property as predicate. It reports a violation if > for any of those target nodes, when you walk ex:property in the inverse > direction, there are more than one value nodes (i.e. the subjects of the > inverse triples). > > (Above the property shape itself carries the target statement, but it > would of course also work via a NodeShape that has the property shape via > sh:property). > > HTH > Holger > > > On 24/01/2020 10:59, [email protected] <javascript:> wrote: > > What if I wanted to create a constraint (in SHACL, perhaps) specifying > that two concepts may not share the same object for a particular property? > I would want a warning to be raised when a user attempts to save a concept > containing the triple > > ex:ConceptX ex:property ex:ConceptY > > > if somewhere else in the vocabulary there already exists the triple > > ex:ConceptZ ex:property ex:ConceptY > > > It occurs to me that such a rule is already enforced for the > skos:prefLabel property in EDG, but I don't know how this is being done > "under the hood." Can anyone advise how to create a similar constraint? > Thanks. > -- > 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] <javascript:>. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/7a0925ed-ea55-405a-8e10-9f45677bfdcb%40googlegroups.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/7a0925ed-ea55-405a-8e10-9f45677bfdcb%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > > -- 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]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/f9c26431-d16f-4893-9d05-17a7f10663b0%40googlegroups.com.
