327: SHACL-SHACL shapes for SHACL-SPARQL ASK, SELECT, and Annotations

[ajnelson-nist]

• See this document rendered online here

This is an addition to (and builds upon) PR #330 . It started as drafting SHACL-SHACL for the Annotations in SHACL-SPARQL, but some of the editorial updates suggested linking to SHACL-SHACL rules for ASK and SELECT queries, which I realized weren't written. So, this PR is slight scope creep over #327, and suggests some TODOs around finishing syntax review rules, e.g. for tying sh:prefixes, and setting up CONSTRUCT and UPDATE shapes.

I suggest either this be merged into #330 , or be handled on its own to finish catch-up with SHACL-SPARQL syntax review.

[HolgerKnublauch]

Thanks. I have just merged the main issue 327 branch into the main branch, so you could pull and merge it back in, and then also perhaps add the syntax rule references that you needed and other changes you proposed in the comment?

[ajnelson-nist]

Reverting to draft. I found a few misalignments between the text, shacl.ttl, and Ask vs. Select validators.

[ajnelson-nist]

@HolgerKnublauch , I wanted to check on direction before coding more: Some of the English from 330 suggested annotations go on Ask or Select Validators, but not all of the coding suggests the same. E.g., sh:resultAnnotation lists a domain of just sh:SPARQLSelectValidator.

It'd be better for sh:resultAnnotation in this case if there were a parent sh:SPARQLValidator of sh:SPARQLSelectValidator and sh:SPARQLAskValidator, but their shared parent is sh:Validator. There isn't a sh:SPARQLValidator.

So, two questions:

• Should sh:resultAnnotation extend its domain to cover Ask Validators?
• Should a sh:SPARQLValidator class be added?

If this matter is graduating to an Issue to follow-on 327, please note so and I'll move this comment.

[ajnelson-nist]

For reference, I posted a visualization in Discussion 380.