search

ucoProject / UCO

This repository is for development of the Unified Cyber Ontology.
Apache License 2.0
73 stars 34 forks source link

pattern:PatternExpression is erroneously encoded as a datatype and class #562

Closed ajnelson-nist closed 2 weeks ago

ajnelson-nist commented 7 months ago

Bug description

The class pattern:LogicalPattern constrains the predicate pattern:patternExpression to have a "range" of pattern:PatternExpression [sic.].

https://github.com/ucoProject/UCO/blob/1.2.0/ontology/uco/pattern/pattern.ttl#L20-L35

pattern:LogicalPattern
    a
        owl:Class ,
        sh:NodeShape
        ;
    rdfs:subClassOf pattern:Pattern ;
    rdfs:label "LogicalPattern"@en ;
    rdfs:comment "A logical pattern is a grouping of characteristics unique to an informational pattern expressed via a structured pattern expression following the rules of logic."@en ;
    sh:property [
        sh:datatype pattern:PatternExpression ;
        sh:maxCount "1"^^xsd:integer ;
        sh:nodeKind sh:Literal ;
        sh:path pattern:patternExpression ;
    ] ;
    sh:targetClass pattern:LogicalPattern ;
    .

pattern:patternExpression (the predicate) is a owl:DatatypeProperty, so it is expected to have a range of some literal.

https://github.com/ucoProject/UCO/blob/1.2.0/ontology/uco/pattern/pattern.ttl#L59-L64

pattern:patternExpression
    a owl:DatatypeProperty ;
    rdfs:label "patternExpression"@en ;
    rdfs:comment "An explicit logical pattern expression."@en ;
    rdfs:range pattern:PatternExpression ;
    .

But, pattern:PatternExpression (capital P) is a owl:Class, not rdfs:Datatype:

https://github.com/ucoProject/UCO/blob/1.2.0/ontology/uco/pattern/pattern.ttl#L48-L57

pattern:PatternExpression
    a
        owl:Class ,
        sh:NodeShape
        ;
    rdfs:subClassOf core:UcoInherentCharacterizationThing ;
    rdfs:label "PatternExpression"@en ;
    rdfs:comment "A pattern expression is a grouping of characteristics unique to an explicit logical expression defining a pattern (e.g., regular expression, SQL Select expression, etc.)."@en ;
    sh:targetClass pattern:PatternExpression ;
    .

This is an OWL 2 DL error. Classes cannot be datatypes, and datatype properties cannot have class ranges.

I came across this while trying to figure out how to use pattern:LogicalPattern to represent a regular expression substitution command, s/foo/bar/g.

To the original drafters of pattern:Pattern: How was this supposed to work? Can somebody please provide a demonstration for that s/... regular expression I gave above, from which we can go back and fix PatternExpression?

Steps to reproduce

Please see snippets above.

Requirements

Requirement 1

UCO's SHACL constraints must remain consistent with OWL design constraints, particularly around object properties versus datatype (literal-value) properties. (This is not a new requirement.)

Requirement 2

pattern:patternExpression and pattern:PatternExpression must be mutually consistent with one another. Currently, patternExression is a datatype property with range PatternExpression, but PatternExpression is a owl:Class, not rdfs:Datatype.

Risk / Benefit analysis

Benefits

Having pattern:PatternExpression established and stable will enable further "downstream" specialization. See e.g. #550 (under draft).

Risks

The pattern namespace was not demonstrated before being included in UCO 1.0.0. If a demonstration is not provided, it will be unclear if freshly-chosen design will be satisfactory.

Competencies demonstrated

Competency 1

Pending demonstration

Competency Question 1.1

Pending demonstration

Result 1.1

Pending demonstration

Solution suggestion

Coordination

ajnelson-nist commented 7 months ago

It seems #550 is built on PatternExpression being an owl:Class. @sbarnum and/or @Bradichus , do you have input on this issue (562)? Should pattern:patternExpression be an owl:ObjectProperty?

ajnelson-nist commented 7 months ago

I suspect that this bug fix will be a backwards-incompatible change, because a property will need to change its OWL property-class. Thus, I'm putting it on the UCO 2.0.0 track.

ajnelson-nist commented 7 months ago

PR 566 has been filed to address this issue. The PR includes a test that detects this OWL+SHACL error pattern. Fortunately, the test only reports this one occurrence.

Note: 566 was written not having seen a demonstration of PatternExpression.

ajnelson-nist commented 7 months ago

Another note on the implementation in PR # 566 : It includes a new OWL test that UCO 1.x.0 fails, and can't be corrected in a backwards-compatible manner. I've not filed another PR to backport this test to 1.x.0 because, due to a logistical need for SHACL validation (where the ontology T-Box is necessarily mixed into the instance data A-Box), all runs of UCO's SHACL rules would report this error in the ontology, no matter the input data. This feels, to me, like a sufficiently unsatisfactory user experience that we should wait until UCO 2.0.0.

ajnelson-nist commented 7 months ago

@plbt5 requested in PR 259 on the CASE website that the new OWL shape get a description comment.

@plbt5 , how about:

uco-owl:sh-datatype-objects-shape
    sh:description "This shape enforces that the sh:datatype constraining predicate does not bind an OWL class for a literal-valued constraint."@en ;
    .
ajnelson-nist commented 7 months ago

A vote described in the meeting as a Solutions Approval vote was held 2023-11-28, and passed by the attending members.

However, in the email announcement, Jira tracking, and on the GitHub Issue, the pending vote was described to be a Requirements Review vote.

Because the solution is incomplete, I am going to “Split the difference” and consider this to be a passed Requirements Review vote.

The solution can’t be complete until the class being modified receives a demonstration.

ajnelson-nist commented 5 months ago

The solution from today's call:

ajnelson-nist commented 2 months ago

@plbt5 requested in PR 259 on the CASE website that the new OWL shape get a description comment.

@plbt5 , how about:

uco-owl:sh-datatype-objects-shape
    sh:description "This shape enforces that the sh:datatype constraining predicate does not bind an OWL class for a literal-valued constraint."@en ;
    .

@plbt5 , do you have a response to this suggestion?

plbt5 commented 2 months ago

Did I request documentation? That's so out of character.

On Wed, 1 May 2024, 16:37 Alex Nelson, @.***> wrote:

@plbt5 https://github.com/plbt5 requested in PR 259 on the CASE website https://github.com/casework/casework.github.io/pull/259 that the new OWL shape get a description comment.

@plbt5 https://github.com/plbt5 , how about:

uco-owl:sh-datatype-objects-shape sh:description "This shape enforces that the sh:datatype constraining predicate does not bind an OWL class for a literal-valued @.*** ; .

@plbt5 https://github.com/plbt5 , do you have a response to this suggestion?

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ucoProject/UCO/issues/562#issuecomment-2088560151, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACAWGQOT64ONLRUG7IP5463ZAD42VAVCNFSM6AAAAAA7K2FVE6VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDAOBYGU3DAMJVGE . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>

plbt5 commented 2 months ago

Agree with suggested comment.

ajnelson-nist commented 2 months ago

Agree with suggested comment.

Added, thank you.