Hello- Thanks for the reply. I have considered doing exactly this, and may end up trying this further. My reservations with this method are that this requires Advanced Features which may not be supported by all SHACL engines, and with every usage of this Target Type the shape must specify itself as a parameter and I was hoping there would be a way to make it a bit smarter to avoid doing that. However, if that's the best option, I'll experiment with it.
On Monday, November 2, 2020 at 10:44:27 PM UTC-5 Irene Polikoff wrote: > Hi Matt, > > There are pre-defined target types in SHACL. You can not change their > behavior. > > There is also a way to create SPARQL based targets using a SPARQL query. > If a query is a pattern that may be re-used in different contexts, you > could declare a custom type by parametrizing the query as described here > *https://w3c.github.io/shacl/shacl-af/#SPARQLTargetType > <https://w3c.github.io/shacl/shacl-af/#SPARQLTargetType>* > > This would be your own type of target, using your namespace, not sh:. > > The query, for example, could have predicate and object as parameters: > > ex:MyTarget > a sh:SPARQLTargetType ; > rdfs:subClassOf sh:Target ; > sh:parameter [ > sh:path ex:predicate ; > sh:nodeKind sh:IRI ; > ] ; > sh:parameter [ > sh:path ex:object ; > sh:nodeKind sh:IRI ; > ] ; > sh:prefixes ex: ; > sh:select """ > SELECT ?this > WHERE { > ?this $predicate $object . > } > """ . > > Then, when you assign this custom target type, you would provide values > for the predicate and object. I have assumed above that objects are > resources. > > This is just a quickly sketched example. I have not tried it. Read the > spec for more details. > > On Nov 2, 2020, at 8:20 PM, Matt Goldberg <[email protected]> wrote: > > Left out a detail- an ideal solution would also avoid sh:node such that > errors in validation reports would be informative instead of sh:node's > uninformative "does not conform to shape" message. > > Thanks for any help! > > On Monday, November 2, 2020 at 8:07:44 PM UTC-5 Matt Goldberg wrote: > >> Hello- >> >> I've experimented with the Custom Targets and Custom Target Types and I >> can't seem to find a reasonable way to define targets in a particular way. >> What I'd like to do is have the focus nodes specified by resources >> themselves via a property that points to the shape to use, effectively how >> rdf:type does for implicit shapes, but by using a specified term in the >> domain ontology instead of rdf:type. In other words, I'd like to specify >> that the focus nodes for some node shape S are the subjects of triples with >> predicate P and object S, where P is specified and is not necessarily >> rdf:type. >> >> sh:targetSubjectsOf and sh:targetObjectsOf do not provide this >> functionality, as they only look at the predicate. I don't think >> $currentShape is pre-bound for custom target types like for constraint >> components (at least my experiments didn't seem to work), but even if it >> is, it would likely be an optional feature as is stated in the >> specification. An ideal solution would be something that would not use any >> TopBraid specific features, as we are using SHACL in other systems as well. >> >> Thanks for any help! >> > > -- > 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/4cc9fc07-6309-4c53-aaee-7073dd62ac2cn%40googlegroups.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/4cc9fc07-6309-4c53-aaee-7073dd62ac2cn%40googlegroups.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/6f1d4307-437a-404c-8628-b304a12efb61n%40googlegroups.com.
