SHACL Shapes to Validate Shapes Graphs
Opened this issue · 9 comments
Hello
Appendix C here https://www.w3.org/TR/shacl/#shacl-shacl provides a link (http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl-shacl ) to a shapes graph to validate shapes.
I see that this is dated from 04-04-2017 and could not find more recent version. My first question is if this is relally the case and this is the reference.
if yes, I am getting 2 types of validation errors. I made a test with a few shapes the results and the test shapes are attached. Could you help me judge what is write and what wrong?
best regards
Chavdar
Just to add that if I try to validate Person example file which is here: https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/blob/gh-pages/data-shapes-test-suite/tests/core/complex/personexample.ttl
I am getting the same kind of validation errors
I am using thsi validation engine:
Resource reportResource = ValidationUtil.validateModel((shapesModelToValidate, shaclShaclModelreference, true);
RDFDataMgr.write(System.out, reportResource.getModel(), RDFFormat.TURTLE);
Right, this file seems to have the problem that it doesn't recognize sh:paths that are IRIs, but only covers the blank node cases. I am attaching a slight modification that addresses this problem - using sh:or instead of sh:node in shsh:PropertyShapeShape. (the xone error is a follow-up problem).
I don't have much memory about the origins of this file other than that it was created in a last-minute rush to satisfy a reviewer right before SHACL was approved. A future revision should replace that file, so I am leaving this ticket open.
Thank you Holger. The changes you did fixed the issue. It will be good that official file to be updated as you said.
Another question appeared.
Is it correct to state that sh:name and sh:description are only applicable for sh:PropertyShape? It looks like this from the vocabulary. If Yes, the shacl-shacl.ttl may need to be updated on this.
Regards
Yes these two only make sense to use with property shapes. I don't see why this would affect shacl-shacl because even node shapes or any other resource may potentially have values for these properties, given that RDF resources are in an open world and the sh:NodeShape shape is not "closed". So there wouldn't really be anything to validate.
Hello,
I am having the following shapes and I think it might be a potential problem in SHACL Shapes to validate Shapes Graph.
Is it a problem with shacl-shacl.ttl.txt or the sh:path should be done differently?
I am getting the right response of the validation of data graph with this Sequence path as list
Shapes
......................................
exsh:Test a sh:NodeShape ;
sh:property exsh:pathTest;
sh:targetClass ex:testClass.
exsh:pathTest
a sh:PropertyShape ;
sh:class ex:MyCompound ;
sh:message "Compound datatype violation." ;
sh:path (ex:testClass.attr1 cim:CompClass.status) ;
sh:nodeKind sh:BlankNode ;
sh:severity sh:Violation .
.................................
The errors are
Source: shsh:ShapeShape
Constraint Component: sh:XoneConstraintComponent, sh:OrConstraintComponent
Path: sh:path
Message: 1) Value has 2 shapes out of 2 in the sh:xone enumeration
2)Value has none of the shapes in the sh:or enumeration
Best regards
Chavdar
Speculating... is it possible that you have used the TopBraid SHACL API 1.3.x to run this? Some versions had a bug related to sh:xone, which is fixed in version 1.3.2. I have tried TBC 6.3.1 and can reproduce that errors are showing up, while the current update shows no errors.
Hello
Yes, I am using version 1.3.1. I just say that there is version 1.3.2. I will try it. If the errors are real errors and not due the shacl-shacl, could you tell me what should be the right way of specifing sh:path so that I have sequence paths and can validate nested structure?
Edit: ops I think i misread I message. Sorry. So if the 1.3.2 fixes this issue already then all is fine :)
Best regards
Chavdar
Hello,
I can confirm that the API 1.3.2 is OK and the thing I reported on 26 March is solved.
Thinket remains open due to Holger's comment on 4 Jan
Best regards
Chavdar