Re: [topbraid-users] owl2shacl

https://shacl-play.sparna.fr/play/home?lang=en Le mardi 5 avril 2022 à 02:56:42 UTC+2, robatki...@gmail.com a écrit : > Great - thanks Holger > > I'm thinking of using this version of it as its already in a git project > with an explicit licence I can pull in an has extended options: > > https:/

Re: [topbraid-users] owl2shacl

Great - thanks Holger I'm thinking of using this version of it as its already in a git project with an explicit licence I can pull in an has extended options: https://github.com/sparna-git/owl2shacl could add licence metadata using ODRL i guess - in this case the repo will suffice as the content

Re: [topbraid-users] owl2shacl

Hi Rob, yes you can freely use that one, with no strings attached. We are always happy if ontologies get converted from OWL to SHACL :) Do you have a specific metadata annotation in mind so that we can clarify this, i.e. what license would you suggest for such things? Note this rule does NO

Re: [topbraid-users] owl2shacl

Hi can anyone in TQ shed any light on the copyright status of the owl2shacl rules - there is no metadata in the file and this is posted on a public access forum, so is there any impediment to utilising it in an open source project? cheers On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 at 12:05, Holger Knublauch wrote: >

Re: [topbraid-users] owl2shacl

I have added two cases (owl:unionOf with length 2 and 3 in the attached update, which will also be part of TopBraid 7.3. Handling arbitrary length lists would require JavaScript but I hope the provided solution will keep you going. Jan, I would appreciate if you could test this and let us know

Re: [topbraid-users] owl2shacl

FYI it’s not hard to extend the OWL2SHACL capability to handle more complex cases. See https://www.topquadrant.com/doc/7.2/user_guide/guidance_specific_to_asset_collection_type/working_with_ontologies/shacl_enablement.html

[topbraid-users] owl2shacl

Hi, We intend to convert an RDFS/OWL ontology to a shape file and, from then on, work with SHACL. So, we are very happy with the conversion functionality. It appears that unions of datatype ranges are not converted. Thus, x:someProperty rdf:type owl:DatatypeProperty ; rdfs:domain x:Domain ;