multimericRDF people: why does everyone still use RDFS and not SHACL for writing schemas, when all the actual validation tools are for SHACL?
Are there even any RDFS validators? I can't find any.
emidiostani@multimeric it depends on your use cases, in general you split the model from the constraints.
For the concepts you defines (classes and properties), you would create persistent uri, therefore providing HTML and RDF représentations.
Then some users might demand to have a collection of your concepts, you could create an ontology.
Some of your classes might be defined as subclass of other vocabulary, so then you use rdfs (shacl leverages rdfs).For model constraints you could release just shacl.
For the concepts you defines (classes and properties), you would create persistent uri, therefore providing HTML and RDF représentations.
Then some users might demand to have a collection of your concepts, you could create an ontology.
Some of your classes might be defined as subclass of other vocabulary, so then you use rdfs (shacl leverages rdfs).For model constraints you could release just shacl.