Thx Irene for inputs, very helpful.
Peter, I can think of: you know which properties are relevant for a class (even
when unconstrained) so you can prepare forms etc.
Wrt extendibility I was thinking isnt owl as extendible as shacl? In owl you
define your restrictions, in shacl too but only in s
Irene,
In respect to (below):
“With OWL, everything is class-base. In other words, you can’t make any
statements about a specific resource or about a group of resources (such as
those that have a date of birth) without creating a class. This may make
ontologies unnecessarily complex. SHA
See in particular the combination of sh:property constraints together
with sh:name, sh:order and sh:group, as elaborated in
https://www.w3.org/TR/shacl/#nonValidation
TopBraid EDG uses this info for its own display and edit forms.
Holger
On 5/12/2018 18:45, 'Peter Bruhn Andersen' via Top
On 5/12/2018 19:08, 'Bohms, H.M. (Michel)' via TopBraid Suite Users wrote:
Thx Irene for inputs, very helpful.
Peter, I can think of: you know which properties are relevant for a class (even
when unconstrained) so you can prepare forms etc.
Wrt extendibility I was thinking isnt owl as exten
Ok, clear
It was meant you can handle much more constraint types actually beyond some
predefined ones
thx
Dr. ir. H.M. (Michel) Böhms
Senior Data Scientist
T +31888663107
M +31630381220
E michel.bo...@tno.nl
Location
This message may contain information that is not intended for you.
Think Irene meant:
Owl: class-LEVEL based (incl. datatype/property constraints etc.)
Versus
Shacl: also instance based (via dynamic target filtering etc. first)
This is important when eg you want to constrain a specific instance of a class
iso all instances of that class.
That is an important im
Hi Rob,
The SPARQLMotion modules sml:ImportFromTextFile and sml:ImportAndSplitTextFile
can be used to read from a text file.
One option would be to write an SWP script that calls sml:ImportFromTextFile to
read the contents of the file into a variable, and then use the apf:strSplit
magic proper
Michael,
Thanks for the clarification.
Mike
From: 'Bohms, H.M. (Michel)' via TopBraid Suite Users
[mailto:topbraid-users@googlegroups.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 5, 2018 8:19 AM
To: topbraid-users@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [topbraid-users] shacl versus owl/cwa
Think Irene m
I've been looking through the documentation to try and figure out how to
generate the GraphQL schema from SHACL. But I've not been able to locate
anything that lays out the steps to do this.
Anyone got any ideas?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"T
I've been working with the new capability to convert OWL/RDFS to SHACL on
some of my ontology files but ran into something that I thought would be
converted. When I run the converter, it states the following:
The conversation has been completed although 1 anonymous superclasses were
> not conv
This happens automatically in TopBraid EDG. You can run GraphQL queries over
any asset collection. The only pre-requisites are:
1. Model must be in SHACL
2. You need to identify public classes/shapes
If a class/shape is declared public for GraphQL, all its subclasses are also
public (as long as
Patrick,
Most likely your guess is correct.
Conversion is performed using SHACL rules. To see (and modify if needed) rules,
o to the TopBraid project, then open owl2shacl.ttl under SHACL. If I understand
your model correctly, in SHACL you would use sh:class constraint with an sh:or
statement.
Not using sh:in somehow ?
(I have similar constraints in situations where enumeration datatypes are
modelled as classes but where the actual allowed subset differs per domain
(sub)class; ie a range is not specific enough)
I also would like to know what the manual shacl code looks like in the e
In addition to what Irene wrote: the bulk of the documentation for this
feature is currently online, e.g. at
https://www.topquadrant.com/graphql/shacl-graphql.html
This describes how the system generates the query-able GraphQL schema as
used by TopBraid. This includes things like the 'wher
I suggested sh:class because this would include subclasses of classes in the
constraint. If the exact match, not included subclasses, is desired, then one
could do sh:in constraint on rdf:type.
> On Dec 6, 2018, at 8:25 AM, 'Bohms, H.M. (Michel)' via TopBraid Suite Users
> wrote:
>
>
> Not
15 matches
Mail list logo
