More SHACL Rules tests

[afs]

More syntax tests.
Add wellformedness and stratification test areas.

The file names are not stable - as more tests are added they may fit better along side existing tests which alters the numbering.

Part of #677

At the moment, the syntax tests and wellformedness are generated from a script. This only really matters for syntax tests because there are a lot of them and new tests are likely to affect naming/numbering. To make a PR for new tests, create a new directory and we can combine them when the test suite settles down. When we have a first complete set, scripting shouldn't be needed.

The evaluation tests are hand-crafted so it is possible to make PRs for corrections and new tests now.

[simonstey]

PREFIX : <http://example/>

:x :q :o

this is missing a .

[simonstey]

this should eventually also add an entry for rules to: https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/blob/gh-pages/shacl12-test-suite/tests/manifest.ttl right?

[afs]

this should eventually also add an entry for rules to: https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/blob/gh-pages/shacl12-test-suite/tests/manifest.ttl right?

Unclear.

First - it assumes a system is a complete implementation of all of SHACL (UI? Profiles?). That does not reflect the client/server split.

Second - while at the highest level, they use the same vocabulary, the SHACL 1.0 test framework diverged from the original DataAccess work in the details.

The barrier for rules is that the result graph needs to be compared to a reference graph. Having the input and expected output in one graph does not work. NOT would also makes it "interesting".