#1174: WG Revision: SHACL 1.2 SPARQL

Visit on Github

Opened Dec 1, 2025

Specification

https://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/shacl12-sparql/

Explainer

https://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/shacl12-overview/#whatsnew

Links

Feature 1:
Cleaner Separation between Core and SPARQL
We now have a cleaner separation of Core and SPARQL concerns into separate specifications. This helps indicate SHACL Core is not dependent on SPARQL, clarify other dependencies, and make some implementations easier.

The specification

Where and by whom is the work is being done?

  • GitHub repo: https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/
  • Primary contacts:
    • @HolgerKnublauch, Top Quadrant, main editor
    • @ashleysommer, Aust. Government, DCCEEW, secondary editor
    • @nicholascar, KurrawongAI, WG co-chair
    • @PapoutsoglouE, Y.digital, WG co-chair
  • Organization/project driving the specification: Top Quadrant, Aust. Gov., KurrawongAI, Y.digital, INRIA
  • This work is being funded by: in-kind only from editors' & co-charis' orgs
  • Primary standards group developing this feature: Data Shapes WG
  • Incubation and standards groups that have discussed the design: This is build on top of RDF 1.2 work and we have members in common with that WG and discussed it with them

Feedback so far

You should also know that...

No response

<!-- Content below this is maintained by @w3c-tag-bot -->

Track conversations at https://tag-github-bot.w3.org/gh/w3ctag/design-reviews/1174

Discussions

Log in to see TAG-private discussions.

Discussed Dec 8, 2025 (See Github)

Skipped

Comment by @csarven Jan 29, 2026 (See Github)

The TAG thanks the Data Shapes WG for requesting this review.

The TAG notes that separating the SPARQL parts from SHACL Core is a reasonable direction to simplify implementations and testing, while also supporting future extensibility of SHACL extensions. Based on the change history, no new features or normative changes affecting web architecture were noted, so a full TAG review is not required at this time. If there are however significant changes that the WG would like TAG's review on, we'd be happy to.