All my rules are of the form: sh:rule [ a sh:TripleRule ; sh:object [ ... sh:predicate ... sh:subject ... ]
or sh:rule [ a sh:SPARQLRule ; sh:construct """... ] I see how to replace the TripleRule syntax with sh:property [ sh:path ... sh:values [ for the SPARQL, what's the syntax? I didn't see an example in the spec. Is it: sh:property [ sh:path ... sh:values [ sh:rule [ a sh:SPARQLRule ... Regardless, the sh:rule use represents our one departure from the official SHACL spec. , so I need to be cognizant that some people are using pySHACL or other implementations). Also, we often want to view the graph without any inference - representing a "compact" form for data exchange, to be expanded through inferencing at the receiving end. Can the automatic inferencing be turned on or off in both TBC-ME and EDG? P.S. Regarding my original questions, I still don't understand what controls the Expand Node/Show Neighborhood choice for instances. In my tests, some instance relations are showing up but most are not. Steve On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 10:08 AM Holger Knublauch <[email protected]> wrote: > Out of interest, can some of your inferences be expressed using sh:values > rules? In EDG (and Studio) those would be shown directly on forms and > executed continuously (without being asserted). Note that if you want to > express your rules in SPARQL you can also still do that in sh:values rules. > > Holger > > > > On 29 Jun 2022, at 9:39 am, Steve Ray <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > I'm gingerly testing out moving over to EDG Studio, and am having trouble > recreating some of the things I used to do in TBC-ME. Are they possible in > Studio, and if so, how? > > 1. Run the SHACL reasoner iteratively until no new triples are generated. > (The only way I have found to do this is to repeatedly press the "Execute > rules" button myself. Ouch) > > 2. Run the SHACL reasoner but not assert the results. I really liked the > "purple display" of the inferred triples in TBC-ME, which made it simple > for me to see what I had created vs. what was inferred. Is there some > alternative way to distinguish the two in Studio? > > 3. Anything approximating the "Graph" view for instances. > > Thanks! > > Steve > > > > -- > 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/CAGUep86CKrorYwmtqtr2UA5R2yT8URba7WGpU3CsCME3d8Sg0w%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/CAGUep86CKrorYwmtqtr2UA5R2yT8URba7WGpU3CsCME3d8Sg0w%40mail.gmail.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/1B066EE8-EFFD-43E4-B802-A42DF566065F%40topquadrant.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/1B066EE8-EFFD-43E4-B802-A42DF566065F%40topquadrant.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/CAGUep86wC7pORwufBgEVH99A%3D8%3DNQzT%3D_tNUCguh4fW9sPhqWg%40mail.gmail.com.
