Miika, the properties are there, but none have ranges, which I think is
unfortunate. I presume that ranges would be appropriate, and a stated
range serves in a sense as documentation for the intended use of the
property.
The reason Protege fails to load them is that it converts all RDF to OWL
(via the Manchester OWL convert API, I believe), and the algorithm drops
them due to lack of information that would indicate what the OWL
equivalent is. (Note that the Dublin Core 1.1 ontology suffers the same
fate for the same reason.) Although they are valid RDF, the properties
are, IMO, under-defined for practical use.
kc
On 7/27/15 12:03 AM, Miika Alonen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I used SHACL in my example profile. Properties and classes are defined there at the end of the SHACL schema. Some of the property declarations might be missing and different from the current draft. I asked about this from Holger (editor) and he added some of the missing properties, but also replied that it is not meant to be traditional RDF(s) vocabulary (and those property declarations are not really needed) as SHACL has its own way of declaring properties.
>
> So, i suppose Protege (or any other editor) would need new module to fully support SHACL once it is finished.
>
> br,
> Miika
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "kcoyle" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Sent: Sunday, 26 July, 2015 23:44:55
> Subject: Re: [RDF AP] Darwin Core, SHACL, and APs
>
> Kai, Thomas,
>
> is there an RDF vocabulary behind that that can be shared? I'm curious
> how close it adheres to DSP/DCAM.
>
> Also, has anyone yet played with the SHACL turtle file?[1] It's probably
> just a draft, but I find it to be rather odd, with no ranges on
> properties, and classes which are essentially "methods." I'm curious how
> it plays in software people are using. (It fails in Protege[1], but that
> requires a conversion to OWL.)
>
> kc
> [1] http://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/shacl/shacl.shacl.ttl
> [2] http://protege.stanford.edu/
>
> On 7/23/15 4:08 PM, Kai Eckert wrote:
>> BTW, Thomas has provided the long-missed implementation of DSP, so the
>> point of your interviewees is not valid anymore, at least for RDF data.
>
--
Karen Coyle
[log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
|