Skip to content
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

Added detailed hydra description with OWL vocabulary #17

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Oct 14, 2022

Conversation

alien-mcl
Copy link
Member

@alien-mcl alien-mcl commented Jul 5, 2021

This pull request comes with a minor extension that adds detailed hydra description created in OWL.

Feel free to deliberate more on those descriptions.

Copy link
Collaborator

@tpluscode tpluscode left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't like it. It looks like you simply search/replaced the OWL to become SHACL, but shapes would be different, used differently, and serve different purpose than OWL constraints.

I propose we even take a step back there and go class-by-class. As is, the document is a little large to try and review in a meaningful manner. My proposal would be begin with hydra:ApiDocumentation's shape first and follow the vocabulary to add the rest in subsequent PRs

hydra-in-owl/hydra_in_owl.ttl Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
hydra-in-owl/index.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
hydra-in-shacl/index.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@alien-mcl
Copy link
Member Author

No - it was not the case. Both OWL and SHACL versions were written from scratch separately, but were put against each other to have i.e. cardinalities in sync.

My entry point was a Hydra rewritten to turtle notation (I'll make a separate PR for that in Specification repo) and then class by class, predicate by predicate both OWL restrictions and SHACL shapes were created. It may look similar though as the order of the terms is the same (due to fact of using same entry point).

I also totaly disagree to move in a PR per term basis - it'll take ages while the task is quite simple. I may consider separating OWL and SHACL though.

@alien-mcl
Copy link
Member Author

BTW, is there any list of valid statuses bikeshed accepts? The spec does not enumerate any and existing specifications are not using two letter derivatives.

@tpluscode
Copy link
Collaborator

tpluscode commented Jul 6, 2021

It is not a simple task, as evidenced by this PR. I cannot really comment on the OWL but there is much to improve in SHACL and it will be much more productive to start small and progress gradually

I think you're looking for https://tabatkins.github.io/bikeshed/#metadata-status?

@alien-mcl
Copy link
Member Author

Hmm - I think it's as simple as creating old school pseudo classes, but not with a programming language but with other means. Let us not over-engineer it.

I see that I'll have to make OWL and SHACL separated to make it simpler.

@alien-mcl alien-mcl changed the title Added detailed hydra description with OWL and SHACL vocabularies Added detailed hydra description with OWL vocabulary Jul 10, 2021
@alien-mcl
Copy link
Member Author

I've moved SHACL to separate PR leaving OWL alone.

@alien-mcl alien-mcl requested a review from tpluscode August 3, 2021 19:26
@tpluscode
Copy link
Collaborator

The changes got lost here too 🤔

@alien-mcl
Copy link
Member Author

Ok - I've recovered all changed files as these were ... ignored :/

Copy link
Collaborator

@tpluscode tpluscode left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think I should "tentatively" approve this. As I said, I feel that this is too big and it's hard to review and verify correctness.

That said I do not intend to actually work on the OWL representation anyway in the foreseeable future...

@tpluscode tpluscode merged commit 85877c3 into HydraCG:master Oct 14, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants