Missing Type for `shsh:`

[hoijui]

https://github.com/w3c/shacl/blob/67459ed023305fdd63d35f25bd422045d77425fb/shacl-core/shacl.ttl#L29

shacl.ttl:

sh:
	a owl:Ontology ;
	# ...
	sh:suggestedShapesGraph <http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl-shacl#> .

sh:suggestedShapesGraph
	# ...
	rdfs:range owl:Ontology ;
	# ...

shacl-shacl.ttl (see NOTE below):

shsh:
       # NOTE: Missing `a owl:Ontology ;`
	rdfs:label "SHACL for SHACL"@en ;
	rdfs:comment "This shapes graph can be used to validate SHACL shapes graphs against a subset of the syntax rules."@en ;
	sh:declare [
		sh:prefix "shsh" ;
		sh:namespace "http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl-shacl#" ;
	] .

[HolgerKnublauch]

This triple is not required. Why are you suggesting this? rdfs:range has no meaning in SHACL.

[ajnelson-nist]

It took me a second to infer the request, but it looks like the request is to add a triple to SHACL-SHACL: shsh: a owl:Ontology .

@hoijui noted the triples that would make this type a consequence of RDFS inferencing applied to ... sh:suggestedShapesGraph shsh:.

There was another issue floating around that would come at this the other way from an rdfs:domain statement, #131 .

Relatedly, this sentence is in the 2017 SHACL specification's Section 5.2.1, and is still present in today's state of the editor's draft:

The recommended subject for values of sh:declare is the IRI of the named graph containing the shapes that use the prefixes. These IRIs are often declared as an instance of owl:Ontology, but this is not required.

So, I agree that the triple @hoijui requested is not required. It would, by RDFS inferencing, be entailed. For reasons I'll note in a separate issue, I don't think currently it would be entailed by OWL inferencing.