consider options for using SHACL on graphs

[VladimirAlexiev]

CIM uses many graphs: each model is a graph.
So the question which graphs are subject to validation becomes important.
(I don't know whether there are plans to separate shapes into graphs? For now they are laid out in to separate files)

• https://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/shacl/#data-graph

A data graph is one of the inputs to the SHACL processor for validation. SHACL processors treat it as a general RDF graph and makes no assumption about its nature. For example, it can be an in-memory graph or a named graph from an RDF dataset or a SPARQL endpoint.
SHACL can be used with RDF graphs that are obtained by any means, e.g. from the file system, HTTP requests, or RDF datasets.

• Here the association data-shapes is dynamic, and the spec doesn't specify how exactly that is passed to the validation engine
• https://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/shacl/#sh-shapes-graph says that triples sh:shapesGraph in the data can suggest which shapes to select for validation
• https://afs.github.io/shacl-datasets.html "Extending SHACL to RDF Datasets" is a proposal by @afs (maker of Jena) to connect shapes to certain graphs. It uses triples for that connection
• https://graphdb.ontotext.com/documentation/10.8/shacl-validation.html#union-of-data-graphs-when-validating-the-results describes another approach how to associate data and shapes by using triples

If we describe our test scenarios in triples, then it makes sense to also describe the data and shapes graphs in triples?