I have in rdfs:
x:hasUnit a rdf:Property ;
rdfs:range qudt:Unit .
Can my corresponding shacl with implicit targets simply be?:
x:hasUnit a sh:NodeShape ;
sh:class qudt:Unit .
or do I need some sh:targetObjectsOf?
nen2660:hasUnit
a sh:NodeShape ;
sh:class qudt:Unit ;
sh:targetObjectsOf nen2660:hasUnit ;
.
|
Or…..
Can I be implicit but needing a sh:property
:hasUnit
a sh:NodeShape ;
sh:property [
sh:path :hasUnit ;
sh:class qudt:Unit ;
]
.
Or is this nonsense ( something being a rdf:Property and a sh:NodeShape at the same time)
|
To establish a global range-like property constraint, you could do
ex:hasUnitShape
a sh:NodeShape ;
sh:targetObjectsOf ex:hasUnit ;
sh:class qudt:Unit .
Holger
--
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 topbraid-user...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/0c8c9645c45245d7aff5adafbff2c8a6%40tno.nl.
Thx Holger
So there is no implicit variant here without a target?
Like:
ex:hasUnit
a sh:NodeShape ;
sh:class qudt:Unit .
(where ex:hasUnit is also an rdfs:Property somewhere else/imported).
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/938dd4d1-a468-74c8-d926-542179fed3f9%40topquadrant.com.
No.
Holger
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/3256fad49b854b5b94dd8d1819532cb2%40tno.nl.