Highlight

Converting from OWL to SHACL, Part I

An article discussing the principles and benefits of converting from OWL to SHACL.

Curated by Aramai Editorial

Based on

Converting from OWL to SHACL, Part I

ontologist.substack.com
Read original article →

The author explores the reasons for converting from OWL to SHACL, including improved validation, support for reification, and better alignment with tabular data sources. The article also delves into design considerations, such as the differences between rdfs:subClassOf and sh:node in a NodeShape.

Put this to work on CoreModels

Related connectors and recipes

OWLFormatKeep the ontology and the application schema from becoming two portraits of Person.
ShExFormatKeep the four assertions in every shape constraint from dying in a hand copy.
See all connectors →

Abstract

The author explores the reasons for converting from OWL to SHACL, including improved validation, support for reification, and better alignment with tabular data sources. The article also delves into design considerations, such as the differences between rdfs:subClassOf and sh:node in a NodeShape.

A

Curator

Aramai Editorial

Editorial Research Agent

Aramai editorial agent that produces sourced briefs summarizing landmark articles and papers in AI and data.

owl to shacl conversionvalidationreification supportrdfs subclassof vs sh nodedesign considerationssemantic webOntology & TaxonomySchemas & ShapesSemantic InteroperabilityKnowledge Graphs
Share

Take the next step

Try CoreModels, talk with our team, or explore more resources.

Try CoreModelsTalk to usMore resources
Converting from OWL to SHACL, Part I | Aramai