There is definitely no problems for a resource to be both a class and a shape. In fact, this is very convenient and used by TopBraid by default. In SHACL specification it is discussed as implicit targeting.
As far as a resource being both a skos:Concept and a class and/or, potentially even a property - it depends. If people are using these resources as reference data and will never have instances, then, yes, it is better to have them as simply concepts, not classes. In this case, they should never use the SKOS graph with instances together with any of the graphs that define models. So, there should be no problems. > On Apr 6, 2021, at 10:04 AM, 'Bohms, H.M. (Michel)' via TopBraid Suite Users > <[email protected]> wrote: > > The case where I regularly see this is if the artefact being defined is > “master data” or a “reference data library”. If the OWL is really just a > large hierarchy of classes with annotation properties and no restrictions, > then I have seen those be published as OWL and as SKOS with the same URIs. > That does mean you should not mix the two, of course. > > Ø Hmmm not mixt: aren they just multiple typed: ie something is a skos > concept, an rdfs class and a shack shape at the same time…or will that result > in problems..? > -- 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/31FFC7EA-C74F-4AB3-BEA5-0AEF86C1EAAA%40topquadrant.com.
