-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 40
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add SHACL validation using SHACL-SHACL #335
base: develop
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
I'm guessing certain features in the shacl-shacl are not supported. https://rdf4j.org/documentation/programming/shacl/#supported-shacl-features states for example:
shacl-shacl contains a lot of those, so maybe that causes the exception to be thrown instead of a shacl violation report. One option is to postpone this feature until we have a library that supports it. Alternative is to slim down the shacl-shacl shapes to the supported features from rdf4j's shacl validation. |
Hmmm 🤔 Maybe having there an exclusion mechanism for all triples with predicates not listed in |
Worth a try. Would we then warn about unsupported triples and reject the shape? Or silently ignore them? (sounds like the worst option of the two). |
That would require some validation reporting back what will be ignored... and some unsupported things are also a bit more complicated than just a predicate not in a list (as you indicated the one with |
5ff383a
to
3be9e5a
Compare
3b881d1
to
9b12ef6
Compare
@kburger It seems that after rebasing to the newest develop (with new version of RDF4J) this passes all tests. Question is whether we want to still improve something here... |
Next step: check error messages and possibly improve what is displayed in the client |
supersedes #95